🚀 go-pugleaf

"Paul E. Schoen" <pstech@smart.net> wrote in message 
news:481b8c3b$0$19810$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net...
> Yes, I tend to agree. I saw an early example of this even at Johns Hopkins 
> University, where I attended from 1966 to 1970. For one thing, I had 
> problems with advanced calculus, and I really did not understand much. I 
> would get scores of 15 or 25 out of 100. Yet they were graded on the curve, 
> and I actually passed!

I had a control systems class like that... the guy teaching it was very good 
at math and loved to use rather fancy linear algebra in his lectures and on 
the homework assignments and exams.  I definitely suffered, having a weak 
background in it at the time (and still rather spotty today, although 
definitely far better now than then), but most of the class was in a similar 
boat (i.e., lots of low scores) and the guy was an easy grader.

I didn't learn a whole lot, unfortunately.  I realize it's a hard call for 
professors to essentially stand by their principles and actually mean it when 
they say you need such-and-such requisites, but when you end up with a 
significant fraction of your class not getting anything out of it due to many 
of the students being allowed to "slide by" in those pre-requisite courses, 
that's of course a problem too.

> This attitude, poor character, and lack of responsibility also appears as 
> poor decision making in real life, as evidenced by many of those who are now 
> losing their homes in the sub-prime mortgage crisis. Many of these people 
> were duped into getting themselves into unrealistic situations because they 
> did not get a good education, which was freely offered to them, and had the 
> expectation that things would be just given to them because they were 
> somehow entitled to it.

Yep, I think you're absolutely correct here.

I am a bit disappointed in some of the companies that offered those loans as 
well, though.  Yes, it was certainly legal, but I couldn't imagine running a 
business like that and still showing my face in public or visiting my mother 
for Sunday dinner.

> I was challenged on this when I brought it up and discussed it on 
> rec.pets.dogs.behavior, where most people thought I was being heartless and 
> uncaring about these poor people.

I'm definitely a bit of a softie, but when it comes to spending tax dollars I 
draw the line at anything much more than making sure people have enough food 
to eat, some sort of shelter over their heads (a 500 sq. ft. studio apartment 
is plenty for a single person), and a bus pass and library card to get a job 
and do some research/use the Internet -- bailing them out of their bad 
mortgage for their 4000 sq. ft. ranch is not a good use of tax dollars.

---Joel