patrick.net

Troy says

Almost nobody needs to know what the pythagorean theorem is.

You must be kidding. Of course they don't. But it's illogical to assume that before someone has enriched themselves, with a wide variety of knowledge, and yes practice in a variety of different types of thinking, that they would be able to choose their path, and choose too early all of the things that they will not learn.

You want to throw away the enrichment part of education ?

I personally am somewhat visually oriented, as I know you are as well. Geometry was when I really got turned on to Math, much more than I previously was in Algebra. Since ancient Greece, Geometry has been a part of a classical education, because of the practice one gets in logic and in thinking, not because very many people are actually going to need the Pythagorean Theorem. Supposedly, being in Plato's little philosophy group, had as a minimal required facility with Geometry. They say the inscription above Plato's academy said, "Let no one ignorant of geometry enter here."

I believe the problem is one of having a culture that doesn't trust in the value of education. Even a very intelligent guy such as yourself doesn't buy it.

Troy says

The problem with schools is that we have a conveyor belt to nowhere

This is exactly what many of the poor, with uneducated parents think. They dont trust that the hard work, discipline and persistence required to be academically successful will pay off. And if they didn't achieve much academically themselves, they might be insecure about whether their kids can succeed in school. (they sometimes wish to protect their kids from risk of failure).

This lack of trust in education for education sake is implied in what you say as well.

If we had a culture that believed universally in the value of education, and who insisted on it for their kids, and even who based mating decisions on how well educated their future spouse is (that's right I'm even bringing sex in to it - what you don't think smart could be sexy ?). This is a deep belief that does not exist in our culture.

In bad neighborhoods it's the ultimate in being uncool and unattractive to be a "school boy" or "school girl." Even having a back pack or carrying books at some schools might get a guy beaten up. How fucked up is that? I don't know the answer. Turning those beliefs around can't happen immediately, and I think the corporate powers that be are probably conflicted about it.

Cheap labor ? Uninformed easy to manipulate (dumbass) electorate ? Is the right wing really interested in changing that ?

marcus says

In bad neighborhoods it’s the ultimate in being uncool and unattractive to be a “school boy” or “school girl.” Even having a back pack or carrying books at some schools might get a guy beaten up.

I think urban people can point to more examples of community success in pro sports than technology or otherwise productive enterprise.

I believe in education for education's sake but that's not going to pay the rent.

Geometry was useful as brain exercises, in being able to follow and construct proofs from axioms. But as an activity it's not far removed from sudoku in terms of imparting useful knowledge.

A year of probability and statistics would have been much more useful. That was one of my favorite classes in college, but it had to wait until my senior year(s).

Math is great if you want to teach math or have one of the few jobs that requires rigorous mathematical backing. Otherwise the waste of classroom hours is rather significant I think.

Perhaps the end of the escalator should be a two-year Army stint like it was in the 50s. That's one way to get the right wing behind investing in our human capital.

Troy says

Math is great if you want to teach math or have one of the few jobs that requires rigorous mathematical backing. Otherwise the waste of classroom hours is rather significant I think.

Well, I'm not going to argue with you much on this, but I strongly disagree. It shows your bias. My guess is you were much more successful in school in history than you were in Math. I was the opposite.

I'll just add this as food for thought, one of the things I try to explain to kids who question, "what is this good for?" Math is like a language, without being fluent in it, you can't fully appreciate it's value. Where kids are with Math in high school is analogous to where they were in reading, in about 3rd grade. Then they were almost ready to put their reading skills to use, reading literature, history or whatever. In Math you don't get to where you can really put Math to use (I'm not talking elementary arithmetic here or balancing your checkbook), until after high school Math.

TO quit Math before finishing high school Math would be sort of like quiting reading at age six.

That's partly what is hard about Math. One is old enough (and with some support from some uneducated adults) to question the value of higher level Math, before comprehending what it is. Besides, Math is essential to so many fields, why limit oneself ? But that bring us back to the question of do you decide at twelve what you will do with your life, or do you educate yourself first, before deciding ? To me, here in 2010, the answer to that should be obvious.

Troy says

I believe in education for education’s sake but that’s not going to pay the rent.

Are you sure ?

If a student feels passionately the same way, about the value of education for education sake, are you sure that in the long run it won't pay the rent ? Once one is well on their way with their education, how hard is it, at grad school time or earlier to direct or redirect their educational focus towards how they will make a living ?

Back to the thread: the link to Sheila Bair's Washington Post Op-Ed piece. When you read this, compare what the head of the FDIC has to say with some of the comments in here (Hi Ducky).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/25/AR2010112502215.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

marcus says

Ray’s point is weak though, because you can’t compare our role in the world now to Germany’s between WWI and WWII. For example, the Deutsch Mark was the not the world reserve currency.

It's not as weak as you might think. Weimar and the American government have a lot in common. The fact that we have the world's reserve currency isn't the issue. What is the issue is that we are spending at a rate that cannot be sustained. "Quantitative Easing" is nothing other than printing money, which debases the currency in circulation. It also, has a direct effect on other nations' desire to continue to loan us money in which to operate. Currently, $2.5 billion PER DAY must be borrowed (via T-bonds) from foreign sources such as China, Japan, etc. This cannot continue, precisely what the FDIC chair is attempting to say.

Furthermore, the reserve currency status is on shaky ground. Recently, China & Russia made an historical agreement to forego using the U. S. dollar in their trade deals. They are now trading with their own currencies because they are losing trust in the dollar due to QE1 & QE2. Monetizing the debt is the last phase by desperate nations that have run out of options. It's the same as if you were bartering with someone using expensive wine for exchange and the other side began to add water. Would you be satisfied with that?

RayAmerica says

Back to the thread

From Ray's link

Fixing these problems will require a bipartisan national commitment to a comprehensive package of spending cuts and tax increases over many years. Most of the needed changes will be unpopular, and they are likely to affect every interest group in some way.

Based on what I see in our political environment, politicians will insist we go through terrible unimaginable pain, or maybe world war, before such bipartisan problem solving can occur. It is sad. The only solution would be to take the big money out of politics and to act like grown ups.

Both parties have proven that they are reckless spenders. In Washington a "cut" in spending is a decrease in the amount of the INCREASE in spending. Only in government can this type of fraud go on without any serious repercussions. For the most part, politicians have always been a dishonest lot, and the bunch we've had for the last 35 years has been the worst of the worst, IMO.

marcus says

My guess is you were much more successful in school in history than you were in Math

No, I was taking calculus in night classes at CC my senior year since my school didn't have AP Calculus (and taking actual college classes makes much more sense than this AP nonsense anyway). I continued this with the full series of engineering Math classes required for my major, and saw much beauty and structure -- and utiiity -- in the higher calculus classes. They were hard, but what I got from them was fair.

But that was 20+ years ago now and I've forgotten all that now and all the pages of trigonometric substitutions to do integrations etc. etc. is all gone.

One thing I noticed at the time is that math really didn't get interesting until it was solving stuff other than toy problems. And to do that you need to have physical units and some degree of dimensional analysis (if nothing else to check your work). It was when my freshman college physics class covered how to do math "for real" that math began to have any applicability to my day-to-day life.

I'm looking over the Algebra II sample set and seeing nothing that is changing my mind here, LOL

I think we need "Math Appreciation" courses along with parallel courses dealing with Chemistry and other sciences. Focus the rest of the time on actual intellectual development, like what they do in the elite private schools. Focus on keeping math useful.

RayAmerica says

For the most part, politicians have always been a dishonest lot, and the bunch we’ve had for the last 35 years has been the worst of the worst, IMO.

and yet ...

In the late 90s the Democratic tax rises of 1991-1993 and general budget discipline adhered to by the split government (after the electorate threw out the Democrats for raising their taxes in 1994) actually resulted in government spending moving towards sustainability.

It is not the politicians who are defective, it is us. Well, you, really.

what percentage of the newly created liquid of the past 10 years has left America and landed in non-American hands, in non-American lands? I ask this because I suspect that is why inflation is really being looked at twice, vs auto-inflation like normal. All those non-Americans will just move their holding into and out of their land's correct currency, maintaning their wealth vs state side Americans, while inflation kills their wealth.

just a guess.

marcus says

The only solution would be to take the big money out of politics and to act like grown ups.

Just curious... does your definition of "big money" include the big money from the teachers' unions and other public employee unions?

Sure, if the cost of running were brought down to earth. I'm not saying no lobbying. But when politicians have to spend half their time raising money, something is wrong.

they don't have to, they choose to.

20 years of unchecked invaders and their state supported breeding is a unfunded liability - right?

Bap33 says

20 years of unchecked invaders and their state supported breeding is a unfunded liability - right?

Not to the Dumocrats. They don't view their votes as a "liability."

Sure,... infinite tax paying citizens and productive workers in to perpetuity.

We all have our issues. Anger that doesn't know where to go isn't mine.

marcus says

Sure,… infinite tax paying citizens and productive workers in to perpetuity.

Why not open all borders and ports to anyone and everyone that wants in? On a personal basis, why not open all your doors to your home and allow anyone in to live with you? At least your personal policy will prove you are not a hypocrite. As far as "infinite tax paying citizens," since when are illegals "citizens" that pay "taxes?"

RayAmerica says

At least your personal policy will prove you are not a hypocrite

The "infinite" refers to the future,...their children, their children's children, and so on. And I'm not advocating illegal immigration, it's not fair to those that are ahead of them in line to come in, and we need to do better with letting talented foreign students stay here more easily.

While I'm not advocating it, I don't see it as a scourge. The fact that I think it's probably even a blessing, at least in some ways, doesn't make me a hypocrite for saying it need to stop.

Time for me to stop un-ignoring you Ray.

I bet marcus wishes there was a little icon that would show up on Ray's screen that said, "marcus is ignoring you" .... or "neener neener" .... same diff

The trust fund is invested in US debt, which is why some might think of it as debt. There is a debt there, and assets offsetting it. When that money was coming in, it did allow us to spend more on tax cuts for the rich. It is going to be interesting to see how it plays out. What kind of propaganda are we going to hear about it.

I'm still waiting to see whether I have to give up on Obama, if the tax cuts for the rich don't expire.

marcus says

The trust fund is invested in US debt, which is why some might think of it as debt. There is a debt there, and assets offsetting it.

Marcus is being wasted in here. He really should be in Washington where his talent for double talk would be much more appreciated. LOL

marcus says

The total accumulated surplus from all the years when inflows greatly surpassed outflows is a total surplus of something like 2.6 trillion.

A complete, absolute lie and fraud. The same nonsense that is being promulgated by our government. The fact is, every administration since LBJ has raided the SS surplus, replaced it in the amounts of special, non-sellable IOU Bonds, and spent the SS money as applied to the General Fund. There is no surplus, just paper IOUs.

http://debtism.com/social-security/social-security-surplus-myth-art14.htm

marcus says

Ray, if you could be wrong more gracefully, and weren’t such a jerk I wouldn’t have to keep you on ignore. (just wanted you to know that its not because of your far below average intelligence

marcus says

money was payed out

A free lesson from the one with "far below average intelligence." It's "paid" not "payed." The word "payed" is an archaic English word dealing with ropes. I'm really surprised, being that I'm so dumb and you're so obviously superior in intelligence (as in way above average intelligence and all), that I knew that and you didn't. LOL

I remeber there only being IOU's in the SS pot ... Reagan said something about that I think

By the way, just to clarify for Ray, what the unfunded liabilities are.

The trust fund is invested in debt securities. So the government owes itself money that will be paid out in the future to SS recipients. But the amount it owes itself (the fund) is only equal to what had been paid in to it.

Unfunded liabilities refer the amount that will be needed which exceeds what is in the fund (what the government owes itself) plus future incoming payroll taxes. That is, the total of the debt to future SS recipients plus future payroll taxes at some point will be less than enough to cover pay to recipients. The unfunded liabilities refers only to this shortfall.

The debt part of it, the ious so to speak, are part of the funded liabilities.

They say SS is good if you just tweak it with a combination of increasing the cut off for payroll taxes, and increasing the retirement age. Even without doing anything you would have to live a long time to see SS be in trouble.

They say Medicare is the real time bomb. The baby boomer's big gift back to us will be forcing more health care reform in the next 30 to 40 years. Maybe on the medicare side there could be some kind of means testing whereby those who could afford it would have to buy more expensive medicare supplemental insurance than others do.

You can be sure that with the baby boom there will be some kind of "death panels," that is less spending huge money for a few extra weeks or months of misery.

By the way, just to clarify for Marcus, what the unfunded liabilties are:

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/the-national-debt-is-huge-but-unfunded-liabilities-are-americas-real-red-ink-challenge/

Ray--

It's pretty simple. Here's a hypothetical for you--what if a new disease emerges that affects people over 65, killing 50% before age 68. What does that do to the calculation for unfunded liability?

That's why it's not debt. It's debt when the US has to borrow money from someone to pay out the benefits. Until then it's just a calculation of the future shortfall, based on many, many assumptions which may or may not turn out to be correct.

marcus says

The baby boomer’s big gift back to us will be forcing more health care reform in the next 30 to 40 years.

5-10 really.

The peak of the baby boom was born in 1955 an is therefore the front half of the baby boom wave is aged 55-65 now.

tatupu, when the gov sets money in account "A" from taxes, with a promis of returning that money plus interest at a time in the future .... and then allows non-workers to tap that fund .... and taps that fund to pay for other cash-short handout programs .. and just keeps putting "IOU" in account "A" instead of the promised money that the taxes are supposed to be for .. while still taking out the taxes for account "A" .... wouldn't that be called a debt? Serious question, not starting crap. Thanks

Bap33 says

I remeber there only being IOU’s in the SS pot … Reagan said something about that I think

That is a lie that the right often repeats, yes. Same as their other lies about nearly everything.

Bap33 says

and taps that fund to pay for other cash-short handout programs .. and just keeps putting “IOU” in account “A” instead of the promised money that the taxes are supposed to be for .. while still taking out the taxes for account “A” …. wouldn’t that be called a debt?

Yes, the general fund owes social security $2.6T as of now, $1.5T in FICA over-taxation and another $1.1T in accrued interest.

This is not an unfunded liability, which is the gap between scheduled benefits and what resources the program is expected to have to pay them.

The difference between "Debt Held By the Public" and the "Public Debt" is the amount the general fund has borrowed and spent from the various trust funds.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GFDEBTN

-

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/FYGFDPUN

=

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/FDHBATN

lol .. when you say lie .... do you mean a Clinton type lie or an Arab Terrorist type lie? I was just asking man, geeeze

Bap33 says

tatupu, when the gov sets money in account “A” from taxes, with a promis of returning that money plus interest at a time in the future …. and then allows non-workers to tap that fund …. and taps that fund to pay for other cash-short handout programs .. and just keeps putting “IOU” in account “A” instead of the promised money that the taxes are supposed to be for .. while still taking out the taxes for account “A” …. wouldn’t that be called a debt? Serious question, not starting crap. Thanks

The IOUs from the government to the SS fund are debt. Not sure why you include the BS about illegals in there though.

Troy says

the front half of the baby boom wave is aged 55-65 now.

Yes. And the kind of super expensive life extending procedures are likely to be done between age 75 and 85. Sure, many die younger than that. Bypass and expensive preventative stuff isn't what I was talking about, although that might change some too. But you're right that the impact of the baby boom on health care will start to be felt in 5 or 10 years(much more than it already is). In 30 years many changes will have been made, the reforms will be complete, which was my point.

Bap33 says

Clinton type lie

How does one compare a lie about a politicians personal life (which in some cultures is none of our business), to a lie say about why we should go to war, or about how tax cuts for the rich, when taxes are already extremely low are good for the economy ?

tatupu70 says

Bap33 says

tatupu, when the gov sets money in account “A” from taxes, with a promis of returning that money plus interest at a time in the future …. and then allows non-workers to tap that fund …. and taps that fund to pay for other cash-short handout programs .. and just keeps putting “IOU” in account “A” instead of the promised money that the taxes are supposed to be for .. while still taking out the taxes for account “A” …. wouldn’t that be called a debt? Serious question, not starting crap. Thanks

The IOUs from the government to the SS fund are debt. Not sure why you include the BS about illegals in there though.

I did no such thing!! cmon now, no reason to get jumpy, I really am just asking for info!! I did not mention anything about invaders. Good 'ol lazy Americans get to tap that fund too, wheather they put in a dime or not. Even if it's not THAT EXACT fund, the program used to hand out the cash are funded from the money taken from the SSI account .. there by they accessed the fund.

Bap33 says

Good ‘ol lazy Americans get to tap that fund too

But why didn't you cite these "tapping the fund ?"

1) All the corporate welfare recievers
2) All of those who directly or indirectly receive money from the defense budget (eg Hliburton)
3) The rich whose low taxes are a direct subsidy from uncle sam (that is borrowed from everyone in the future)

I would argue that without the social security surplus that existed for a while, we would be spending just as much on welfare, but we would not have been able to justify the tax cuts for the rich. Remember, the tax cuts were initiated at a time of a "balanced budget" that would not have been balanced if we weren't counting the SS surplus.

Do you see the logic ? Do you see who really was tapping the SS Trust fund ?