What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

I have nothing to add to this discussion, except that from where I sit there have been far too many mentions of the word "rectum." Please continue.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

I have nothing to add to this discussion, except that from where I sit there have been far too many mentions of the word "rectum." Please continue.

Rectum? **** near killed 'em!
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

John Kerry for Secretary of State... we kind of knew it was coming.

But... that means those of us in Massachusetts have to put up with 6 more months of campaigning. Yay.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

John Kerry for Secretary of State... we kind of knew it was coming.

But... that means those of us in Massachusetts have to put up with 6 more months of campaigning. Yay.

6 months? The campaign will start as soon as Patrick names his replacement. The election won't be until November 2014.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

wrong wrong wrong :D
I thought it was 180 days after Deval appointed himself. Isn't that the Teddy might go law so we don't want Romney appointing a Senator that we the Dem legislature doesn't like?
 
Correct.


Well, I don't know what you did in college, but I know it made me smarter. I never claimed it'd make them more successful. It'd give them the opportunity to become more successful.


Right, but Apple will have a larger candidate pool from which to pick the next great engineer. Johns Hopkins will have a larger candidate pool from which to pick the next great cancer researcher. ConAgra will have a larger pool from which to pick the next great geneticist. The average intellect of the United States will increase, therefore leading to a global competitive advantage. Maybe the unemployment rate among college graduates stays the same, but the average quality of the employed college graduates will improve.

Also, it's free to those who choose to attend. That won't be everybody. In fact, it's probably more important that vocational schooling is free than liberal arts schooling. Somebody posted earlier, a history major is rather useless. There's probably an argument to make for it's absolute value, but as a relative value, you won't get an argument from me.

It would be a huge expense to the country with no test/control to prove it works. Now, the government is full of those but college costs hundreds of billions of dollars a year and there are significant dropout rates (which would go up if you didn't have to pay) and weak majors now. There is no evidence sending everybody who wants to into a university would produce any tangible results.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

I thought it was 180 days after Deval appointed himself. Isn't that the Teddy might go law so we don't want Romney appointing a Senator that we the Dem legislature doesn't like?

priceless just pulling a rover (being wrong :D). it happens.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Since we're talking about free schooling, the new candidate pool won't be a perfect distribution, but it should be partially representative except slightly less wealthy. Also, the pool being larger actually makes better fit the more important factor. For example, in an applicant pool the size of one, the applicant is likely to take the position that pays the most. In an applicant pool the size of two, the employer who pays the most gets to hire the person who'll get the job done just as well at a lower cost. In other words, Apple could get the UX engineer they want who is currently working as a process engineer for Dell, because Dell found somebody who was qualified to be a process engineer who was cheaper and unqualified to be a UX engineer for Apple.

It's kind of like my current situation. I'm overqualified for my position, but it pays too well for me to leave for a more challenging job. If my employer found somebody who could do my job for cheaper, they would.
But you can't compare going from a "pool" of one person to a "pool" of two people to the actual situation - that's not how statistics works.

Per Wiki, 56% of people in the US have attended "some college," but only 30% have completed bachelor's degrees. That means that of people who start college, only 53% complete their degrees. Putting the 44% of people who don't try college now into college is definitely going to achieve even worse results. Having a college degree is not what makes people successful - being the kind of people who have the perseverance to earn a degree is what makes them successful. I really feel that most of those types of people already have the opportunity to go to college.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

But you can't compare going from a "pool" of one person to a "pool" of two people to the actual situation - that's not how statistics works....

his whole collection of posts were giving me a headache. painful stuff to read :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top