NationStates

Saiwania wrote:

Ifreann wrote:A rising tide lifts all boats.

This never happened, however. Some people benefited and many more didn't or got left behind. So clearly, it is better to just embrace inequalities if it is inevitable.

Ifreann wrote:

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:I'm not angry. I just think the major is propaganda.

You must be a big believer in the notion of ignorance being bliss.

---

Saiwania wrote:
If my worldview is wrong, it is because its impossible for everyone to benefit from government policy. Any system by its very nature, is going to have winners and losers.

A rising tide lifts all boats.

---

TURTLESHROOM II wrote:
The American school system isn't stolen from nineteenth-century Prussian military academies by accident. The purpose of schooling is to prepare children for jobs. It is meant to provide them with life skills and things they need to know. My taxpayer dollars should be teaching children to read, write, do arithmatic, balance a budget, and understand how their government works. (Civics, man! Do more civics!)

I also support science education, as it exposes religious children to the majesty of God's Creation , and all children to critical thinking (and STEM).

Teaching children to love to learn, love to read, and things like that are the job of the parents. Fun stuff, like the arts, is for parents. Remember them? There was a time when parents were supposed to expose children to the finer things in life, teach them to appreciate the world around them, give them books to read and crayons to draw...

We rely on the state too much. If you want a more comprehensive, loving, child-centered education, homeschool yoru children. It's better than public school, especially in states where the public schools are corrupted by ideological brainwashing.

Tell me, how much do you know about the arts? How much time have you spent studying the arts? Because you can't teach what you don't know. If all you know about the arts the stuff everyone picks up through pop cultural osmosis, if you think that giving a child a crayon constitutes an education in the arts, then you can't really teach your child about the arts.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

The Republic of Fore wrote:There's often a lot of talk about how to improve the education system in the US. Personally, there's one simple idea we can start with. Stop forcing classes on students that have nothing to do with their chosen field of study, or have little real world application like art or humanities. Not only would it save them time and money, but high schools could replace them with more useful subjects, such as teaching students how to file taxes. What say you NSG?

The humanities are useful when you're interested in not being a complete dumbass. The idea that education should be purely about real-world application is a cancer upon education. Imo we'd be better off forcing STEM into trade schools where it belongs, though it won't matter, in thirty years, STEM majors will be replaced by computers.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:It makes sense, it's just that the corruption inherent in capitalism often makes it such that it doesn't function that way in reality. But in principle, neoliberalism should work.

Ifreann wrote:

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:I'm not angry. I just think the major is propaganda.

You must be a big believer in the notion of ignorance being bliss.

---

Saiwania wrote:
If my worldview is wrong, it is because its impossible for everyone to benefit from government policy. Any system by its very nature, is going to have winners and losers.

A rising tide lifts all boats.

---

TURTLESHROOM II wrote:
The American school system isn't stolen from nineteenth-century Prussian military academies by accident. The purpose of schooling is to prepare children for jobs. It is meant to provide them with life skills and things they need to know. My taxpayer dollars should be teaching children to read, write, do arithmatic, balance a budget, and understand how their government works. (Civics, man! Do more civics!)

I also support science education, as it exposes religious children to the majesty of God's Creation , and all children to critical thinking (and STEM).

Teaching children to love to learn, love to read, and things like that are the job of the parents. Fun stuff, like the arts, is for parents. Remember them? There was a time when parents were supposed to expose children to the finer things in life, teach them to appreciate the world around them, give them books to read and crayons to draw...

We rely on the state too much. If you want a more comprehensive, loving, child-centered education, homeschool yoru children. It's better than public school, especially in states where the public schools are corrupted by ideological brainwashing.

Tell me, how much do you know about the arts? How much time have you spent studying the arts? Because you can't teach what you don't know. If all you know about the arts the stuff everyone picks up through pop cultural osmosis, if you think that giving a child a crayon constitutes an education in the arts, then you can't really teach your child about the arts.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:STEM is a meme, idk why we've let it go to people's heads.

Saiwania wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:STEM is a meme, idk why we've let it go to people's heads.

Show me a machine that can do most if not all of the major STEM trades such as HVAC, Plumbing, Carpentry, Well drilling, etc? A computer can't do any of the physical work required. I'm pretty certain most of STEM is safe provided it requires knowledge/licensing not easily obtained.

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:

Ifreann wrote:You must be a big believer in the notion of ignorance being bliss.

---

A rising tide lifts all boats.

---

Tell me, how much do you know about the arts? How much time have you spent studying the arts? Because you can't teach what you don't know. If all you know about the arts the stuff everyone picks up through pop cultural osmosis, if you think that giving a child a crayon constitutes an education in the arts, then you can't really teach your child about the arts.

Piss off.

Reorganisieren Reichregierung wrote:

Ifreann wrote:You must be a big believer in the notion of ignorance being bliss.

---

A rising tide lifts all boats.

---

Tell me, how much do you know about the arts? How much time have you spent studying the arts? Because you can't teach what you don't know. If all you know about the arts the stuff everyone picks up through pop cultural osmosis, if you think that giving a child a crayon constitutes an education in the arts, then you can't really teach your child about the arts.

Anything skewed towards a certain political bent in education should be suspect unless institutions are willing to admit publically they hold a certain bias. While people do and should have political beliefs, nobody in a ostensibly non-political position should be pushing material with a certain political bent, also bold of you to assume your camp is the bearer of truth.

As for a rising tide, who says everyone is on the boats? The higher the tide rises, the more those on the shore lose. It is impossible to satisfy all interest groups in a society equally.

Ifreann wrote:

I mean, the easiest way to think about gender is to look down your jeans, but honestly it doesnt seem worth it to go to college for gender studies, and woman studies, just so all the people that decided they take that class complain that woman don't go....into....stem courses....
Doesnt make sense to me but its whatever, your the one spending the money.

If you think that all there is to gender is your genitals then maybe you'd benefit from a gender studies class.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Saiwania wrote:
Show me a machine that can do most if not all of the major STEM trades such as HVAC, Plumbing, Carpentry, Well drilling, etc? A computer can't do any of the physical work required. I'm pretty certain most of STEM is safe provided it requires knowledge/licensing not easily obtained.

Anyone who has gone to trade school can do that, they're not hard, you just need training. It's certainly not superior to other forms of education.

I mean things like engineers, chemists, and even physicists will soon be completely outdated by computers.

Also, machines exist or are being developed that can do all of those things.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Saiwania wrote:
Show me a machine that can do most if not all of the major STEM trades such as HVAC, Plumbing, Carpentry, Well drilling, etc? A computer can't do any of the physical work required. I'm pretty certain most of STEM is safe provided it requires knowledge/licensing not easily obtained.

Anyone who has gone to trade school can do that, they're not hard, you just need training. It's certainly not superior to other forms of education.

I mean things like engineers, chemists, and even physicists will soon be completely outdated by computers.

Also, machines exist or are being developed that can do all of those things.

Cekoviu wrote:

Ifreann wrote:If you think that all there is to gender is your genitals then maybe you'd benefit from a gender studies class.

Genitals? I thought they were talking about pockets!

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Saiwania wrote:
Show me a machine that can do most if not all of the major STEM trades such as HVAC, Plumbing, Carpentry, Well drilling, etc? A computer can't do any of the physical work required. I'm pretty certain most of STEM is safe provided it requires knowledge/licensing not easily obtained.

Anyone who has gone to trade school can do that, they're not hard, you just need training. It's certainly not superior to other forms of education.

I mean things like engineers, chemists, and even physicists will soon be completely outdated by computers.

Also, machines exist or are being developed that can do all of those things.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Anyone who has gone to trade school can do that, they're not hard, you just need training. It's certainly not superior to other forms of education. I mean things like engineers, chemists, and even physicists will soon be completely outdated by computers. Also, machines exist or are being developed that can do all of those things.

Reorganisieren Reichregierung wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Anyone who has gone to trade school can do that, they're not hard, you just need training. It's certainly not superior to other forms of education.

I mean things like engineers, chemists, and even physicists will soon be completely outdated by computers.

Also, machines exist or are being developed that can do all of those things.

As if arts and humanities will not be. Art will not go away as long as there are people, I give you that, but once AI good enough to replace physicists exists, it is most likely good enough to do social sciences as well.

Also, a small remnant of STEM will exist - people who make the robots and AI. Nobody is dumb enough to allow strong AI to replicate itself without restrictions programmed in by humans and human oversight. This job market will get oversaturated though, but then again so will art, as lots of people will not be working and have less income to spend on art.

Saiwania wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Anyone who has gone to trade school can do that, they're not hard, you just need training. It's certainly not superior to other forms of education. I mean things like engineers, chemists, and even physicists will soon be completely outdated by computers. Also, machines exist or are being developed that can do all of those things.

Trade school still costs a bunch of money like colleges do.

No one has explained how a machine is going to go inside/outside somebody's house/building to do plumbing for example. A person can still do a better job of fitting pipes and resolving any issues with water infrastructure than any robot in existence. How exactly is a machine going to replace someone's roof if it needs replacing?

Saiwania wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Anyone who has gone to trade school can do that, they're not hard, you just need training. It's certainly not superior to other forms of education. I mean things like engineers, chemists, and even physicists will soon be completely outdated by computers. Also, machines exist or are being developed that can do all of those things.

Trade school still costs a bunch of money like colleges do.

No one has explained how a machine is going to go inside/outside somebody's house/building to do plumbing for example. A person can still do a better job of fitting pipes and resolving any issues with water infrastructure than any robot in existence. How exactly is a machine going to replace someone's roof if it needs replacing?

Reorganisieren Reichregierung wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Anyone who has gone to trade school can do that, they're not hard, you just need training. It's certainly not superior to other forms of education.

I mean things like engineers, chemists, and even physicists will soon be completely outdated by computers.

Also, machines exist or are being developed that can do all of those things.

As if arts and humanities will not be. Art will not go away as long as there are people, I give you that, but once AI good enough to replace physicists exists, it is most likely good enough to do social sciences as well.

Also, a small remnant of STEM will exist - people who make the robots and AI. Nobody is dumb enough to allow strong AI to replicate itself without restrictions programmed in by humans and human oversight. This job market will get oversaturated though, but then again so will art, as lots of people will not be working and have less income to spend on art.

Grenartia wrote:

Reorganisieren Reichregierung wrote:As if arts and humanities will not be. Art will not go away as long as there are people, I give you that, but once AI good enough to replace physicists exists, it is most likely good enough to do social sciences as well.

Also, a small remnant of STEM will exist - people who make the robots and AI. Nobody is dumb enough to allow strong AI to replicate itself without restrictions programmed in by humans and human oversight. This job market will get oversaturated though, but then again so will art, as lots of people will not be working and have less income to spend on art.

Really, we'd have to abandon the entire idea of working for pay. In essence, the moment general AI replaces all jobs, is the moment the Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism meme becomes real. Of course, the gay part won't be enforced, if that concerns you, but still.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Plumbers literally already use machines for a lot of their job.

The Republic of Fore wrote:There's often a lot of talk about how to improve the education system in the US. Personally, there's one simple idea we can start with. Stop forcing classes on students that have nothing to do with their chosen field of study, or have little real world application like art or humanities. Not only would it save them time and money, but high schools could replace them with more useful subjects, such as teaching students how to file taxes. What say you NSG?

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Saiwania wrote:
Trade school still costs a bunch of money like colleges do.

No one has explained how a machine is going to go inside/outside somebody's house/building to do plumbing for example. A person can still do a better job of fitting pipes and resolving any issues with water infrastructure than any robot in existence. How exactly is a machine going to replace someone's roof if it needs replacing?

Plumbers literally already use machines for a lot of their job.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Grenartia wrote:
Really, we'd have to abandon the entire idea of working for pay. In essence, the moment general AI replaces all jobs, is the moment the Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism meme becomes real. Of course, the gay part won't be enforced, if that concerns you, but still.

Tbh you're a fool if you think automation will benefit anyone but the ruling class. Communism must come before automation.