NationStates

Camicon wrote:

The Emerald Dawn wrote:You have 8 hours with which to educate the future generations. 50 minutes of those 8 hours are taken up in between-class breaks. 45 additional minutes are taken up in lunch. 50 more are taken up in (increasingly mandatory) physical education. So out of 480 minutes, you have now removed 145. That leaves you with 335 minutes of education.

How much time do you want to take up explaining to children that An-Caps are fucking idiots?

Emphasis mine.
You say that like it's a bad thing.

No, I'm saying that it is not a class where you can work in vague economic theory.

Coach: [C] "Time to visit everybody's favorite friend Mister Push-Up!"
Students: [S] "Mister Push-Up!"
C: "Down, two three, Up, two three, Down, two three, HOLD! JAMESON, WHAT IS THE FUNCTIONAL MODEL OF SOCIOECONOMIC REFORMS COMMON TO ASIA COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO?"
Jameson: "COMMUNISM SIR!"
C: "Wrong! We're holding in the down position until you get this question right."
Jameson: "SOCIALISM SIR!"
C: "Wrong! Your classmates are starting to hate you for your inability to come up with this answer. I bet those arms are getting really tired!"
Jameson: "MIXED ECONOMY SIR!"
C: "Up! Hold the up position. That is correct. Most of modern North America follows what kind of economic model? Down! Sanderson?"
Sanderson: "Capitalism!"
C: "Wrong! Oh, you are going to love this day kids. We're going to develop your arms nice and good because Sanderson doesn't know simple information."

Individuality-ness wrote:

Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:No, because creationism isn't a scientific theory and hence has no place being taught as a scientific theory alongside scientific theories.

Anarcho-capitalism, bloody stupid as it is, is an economic theory, and hence ought to be taught in economics classes.

True. Should we have classes teaching Objectivist theory as well, if only to educate people on how stupid it is?

Certainly, provided it's kept within a philosophy lesson, although that one shouldn't take too long to explain; I can't imagine explaining the principle of "I look after myself and everyone else can f*ck off" taking more than 5 minutes.

The Emerald Dawn wrote:

Camicon wrote:Emphasis mine.
You say that like it's a bad thing.

No, I'm saying that it is not a class where you can work in vague economic theory.

Coach: [C] "Time to visit everybody's favorite friend Mister Push-Up!"
Students: [S] "Mister Push-Up!"
C: "Down, two three, Up, two three, Down, two three, HOLD! JAMESON, WHAT IS THE FUNCTIONAL MODEL OF SOCIOECONOMIC REFORMS COMMON TO ASIA COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO?"
Jameson: "COMMUNISM SIR!"
C: "Wrong! We're holding in the down position until you get this question right."
Jameson: "SOCIALISM SIR!"
C: "Wrong! Your classmates are starting to hate you for your inability to come up with this answer. I bet those arms are getting really tired!"
Jameson: "MIXED ECONOMY SIR!"
C: "Up! Hold the up position. That is correct. Most of modern North America follows what kind of economic model? Down! Sanderson?"
Sanderson: "Capitalism!"
C: "Wrong! Oh, you are going to love this day kids. We're going to develop your arms nice and good because Sanderson doesn't know simple information."

aaaaand Quoted.

4years wrote:

Wikkiwallana wrote:Are you Ralkovia?

No.

Then why did you begin a reply to a question addressed to them with "of course"? Yes, this is an open forum, but it is still confusing to answer questions to other people in a manner implying you were the intended recipient.

Wikkiwallana wrote:

4years wrote:No.

Then why did you begin a reply to a question addressed to them with "of course"? Yes, this is an open forum, but it is still confusing to answer questions to other people in a manner implying you were the intended recipient.

It's not confusing becuase 'names' are provided, just assume that people will post with the same nation during the thread.

Is the Onion working with Fox, now?

The Emerald Dawn wrote:

Camicon wrote:Emphasis mine.
You say that like it's a bad thing.

No, I'm saying that it is not a class where you can work in vague economic theory.

Coach: [C] "Time to visit everybody's favorite friend Mister Push-Up!"
Students: [S] "Mister Push-Up!"
C: "Down, two three, Up, two three, Down, two three, HOLD! JAMESON, WHAT IS THE FUNCTIONAL MODEL OF SOCIOECONOMIC REFORMS COMMON TO ASIA COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO?"
Jameson: "COMMUNISM SIR!"
C: "Wrong! We're holding in the down position until you get this question right."
Jameson: "SOCIALISM SIR!"
C: "Wrong! Your classmates are starting to hate you for your inability to come up with this answer. I bet those arms are getting really tired!"
Jameson: "MIXED ECONOMY SIR!"
C: "Up! Hold the up position. That is correct. Most of modern North America follows what kind of economic model? Down! Sanderson?"
Sanderson: "Capitalism!"
C: "Wrong! Oh, you are going to love this day kids. We're going to develop your arms nice and good because Sanderson doesn't know simple information."

Oh man, if real gym class worked like that, with the idiots I had to share classes with, I'd be built like this guy.

Grand Britannia wrote:Is the Onion working with Fox, now?

No, because if they were you'd see a marked improvement in Fox's journalistic standards.

The Emerald Dawn wrote:

Camicon wrote:Emphasis mine.
You say that like it's a bad thing.

No, I'm saying that it is not a class where you can work in vague economic theory.

Coach: [C] "Time to visit everybody's favorite friend Mister Push-Up!"
Students: [S] "Mister Push-Up!"
C: "Down, two three, Up, two three, Down, two three, HOLD! JAMESON, WHAT IS THE FUNCTIONAL MODEL OF SOCIOECONOMIC REFORMS COMMON TO ASIA COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO?"
Jameson: "COMMUNISM SIR!"
C: "Wrong! We're holding in the down position until you get this question right."
Jameson: "SOCIALISM SIR!"
C: "Wrong! Your classmates are starting to hate you for your inability to come up with this answer. I bet those arms are getting really tired!"
Jameson: "MIXED ECONOMY SIR!"
C: "Up! Hold the up position. That is correct. Most of modern North America follows what kind of economic model? Down! Sanderson?"
Sanderson: "Capitalism!"
C: "Wrong! Oh, you are going to love this day kids. We're going to develop your arms nice and good because Sanderson doesn't know simple information."

I would so die in that class.

Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:

Individuality-ness wrote:True. Should we have classes teaching Objectivist theory as well, if only to educate people on how stupid it is?

Certainly, provided it's kept within a philosophy lesson, although that one shouldn't take too long to explain; I can't imagine explaining the principle of "I look after myself and everyone else can f*ck off" taking more than 5 minutes.

Quite true, although I guess they could explain how Randian heroes are completely and totally flawed.

Frisivisia wrote:

Ralkovia wrote:
Except there are multiple lines of economic thinking, and teaching what other people think has never been a bad idea for the average liberal. We teach about other cultures, but not a cursory glance at other economic theories?

Would you object to the teaching of communism in schools?

No, I wouldn't. I don't mind learning about other ideas. Why would you care?

Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:

Grand Britannia wrote:Is the Onion working with Fox, now?

No, because if they were you'd see a marked improvement in Fox's journalistic standards.

Not to mention they'd crack jokes that were actually funny, rather than just ponying up awkward laughs after shooting an insult at liberals.

Death Metal wrote:

The Emerald Dawn wrote:No, I'm saying that it is not a class where you can work in vague economic theory.

Coach: [C] "Time to visit everybody's favorite friend Mister Push-Up!"
Students: [S] "Mister Push-Up!"
C: "Down, two three, Up, two three, Down, two three, HOLD! JAMESON, WHAT IS THE FUNCTIONAL MODEL OF SOCIOECONOMIC REFORMS COMMON TO ASIA COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO?"
Jameson: "COMMUNISM SIR!"
C: "Wrong! We're holding in the down position until you get this question right."
Jameson: "SOCIALISM SIR!"
C: "Wrong! Your classmates are starting to hate you for your inability to come up with this answer. I bet those arms are getting really tired!"
Jameson: "MIXED ECONOMY SIR!"
C: "Up! Hold the up position. That is correct. Most of modern North America follows what kind of economic model? Down! Sanderson?"
Sanderson: "Capitalism!"
C: "Wrong! Oh, you are going to love this day kids. We're going to develop your arms nice and good because Sanderson doesn't know simple information."

Oh man, if real gym class worked like that, with the idiots I had to share classes with, I'd be built like this guy.

Image is broken but it says Rybak so I know who your talking about.
FEED! ME! MORE!.....

I dont see any of them biased what so ever, they are just trying not to cause disputes.

Individuality-ness wrote:

The Emerald Dawn wrote:No, I'm saying that it is not a class where you can work in vague economic theory.

Coach: [C] "Time to visit everybody's favorite friend Mister Push-Up!"
Students: [S] "Mister Push-Up!"
C: "Down, two three, Up, two three, Down, two three, HOLD! JAMESON, WHAT IS THE FUNCTIONAL MODEL OF SOCIOECONOMIC REFORMS COMMON TO ASIA COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO?"
Jameson: "COMMUNISM SIR!"
C: "Wrong! We're holding in the down position until you get this question right."
Jameson: "SOCIALISM SIR!"
C: "Wrong! Your classmates are starting to hate you for your inability to come up with this answer. I bet those arms are getting really tired!"
Jameson: "MIXED ECONOMY SIR!"
C: "Up! Hold the up position. That is correct. Most of modern North America follows what kind of economic model? Down! Sanderson?"
Sanderson: "Capitalism!"
C: "Wrong! Oh, you are going to love this day kids. We're going to develop your arms nice and good because Sanderson doesn't know simple information."

I would so die in that class.

I was unforgiving when I was leading our workouts in the military. I was readying people for upcoming promotion exams, forcing in safety lessons, teaching military bearing, and generally causing physical mayhem with the poor bastards who volunteered for my classes.

Arlenton wrote:I dont see any of them biased what so ever, they are just trying not to cause disputes.

Are we talking about Fox News or reality here?

The Emerald Dawn wrote:

Individuality-ness wrote: I would so die in that class.

I was unforgiving when I was leading our workouts in the military. I was readying people for upcoming promotion exams, forcing in safety lessons, teaching military bearing, and generally causing physical mayhem with the poor bastards who volunteered for my classes.

I feel bad for them, but then again, I know the military has high standards. *nod*

Is that a surprise? FOXNews knows that educated people are less likely to watch.

Arlenton wrote:I dont see any of them biased what so ever, they are just trying not to cause disputes.

Who are we talking about here?

... What?! Di- I- How- But- .... WHAT?!?!?!!! Distributive property is a fucking way to solve equations, it has nothing to do with wealth!! Oh no, fuck math, math is all about Communism or something isn't?! I mean sure, you can use math to calculate wealth, but they're not inherently connected!

How can math have liberal bias? It's MATH! Numbers, variations, percentages! There's no opinions or political slant involved, a Liberal and a Conservative can't argue about whether or not 2 plus 2 does in fact equal 4. I mean, I can understand why they would accuse history of being biased (wrong as they are), at least history can be tampered with to fit a point of view, POSSIBLY, but MATH?
What, so is division like feudalism or something? The majority just keeps getting smaller and smaller until we've got the lord left, OR SOMETHING?!

*rant over* No... no... I need to lie down now...

Giovenith wrote:... What?! Di- I- How- But- .... WHAT?!?!?!!! Distributive property is a fucking way to solve equations, it has nothing to do with wealth!! Oh no, fuck math, math is all about Communism or something isn't?! I mean sure, you can use math to calculate wealth, but they're not inherently connected!

How can math have liberal bias? It's MATH! Numbers, variations, percentages! There's no opinions or political slant involved, a Liberal and a Conservative can't argue about whether or not 2 plus 2 does in fact equal 4. I mean, I can understand why they would accuse history of being biased (wrong as they are), at least history can be tampered with to fit a point of view, POSSIBLY, but MATH?
What, so is division like feudalism or something? The majority just keeps getting smaller and smaller until we've got the lord left, OR SOMETHING?!

*rant over* No... no... I need to lie down now...

Dividing over zero is equivalent to finding God.

Calculus has made it possible to use limits to find theoretical values at zero. Thus, Calculus has discovered God. He's a bunch of random numbers... Bit disappointing, if you ask me.

The most ironic thing simply being the fact, that Fox News has the balls to call other things 'biased'. Math is some liberal conspiracy? GTFO.

The Emerald Dawn wrote:How much time do you want to take up explaining to children that An-Caps are fucking idiots?

You do realize, you've inadvertently proven FOX correct. As an educator, your job is to educate people on the ideology, its pro's and con's. Not to proclaim an ideology stupid and then make fun of its believers. Let people decide for themselves.

Duvniask wrote:The most ironic thing simply being the fact, that Fox News has the balls to call other things 'biased'. Math is some liberal conspiracy? GTFO.

Of course it's a liberal conspiracy. There's an equal sign, for God's sake, how much more proof do you need?

= <---------- THERE is communism. Seeping into the education system, through "mathematics", indoctrinating our children with its commie ways.

Duvniask wrote:The most ironic thing simply being the fact, that Fox News has the balls to call other things 'biased'. Math is some liberal conspiracy? GTFO.

Of course Math is a liberal conspiracy. How else do you explain Obama getting the unemployment rate below 8% or how he managed to win Ohio?

Ralkovia wrote:

The Emerald Dawn wrote:How much time do you want to take up explaining to children that An-Caps are fucking idiots?

You do realize, you've inadvertently proven FOX correct. As an educator, your job is to educate people on the ideology, its pro's and con's. Not to proclaim an ideology stupid and then make fun of its believers. Let people decide for themselves.

If an ideology is stupid, you can't educate someone on it without eventually having to address claims of its stupidity.

For example, in US History we learn about slavery. You don't expect educators to assert that enslavement is a valid economic ideology just to make sure they don't hurt the feelings of pro-slavery students. Slavery is a stupid ideology, and it's pointed out as a stupid ideology.