Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Fact checking Fluffo

102 posts in this topic

Posted

that was the quote that confused you?

that was in regards to medical investment in a medical sense not seeing immediate results. You'll notice there's nothing in there about economic impact.

I said programs without immediate results get cut. Hence my confusion when you followed that up with

Programs like this never have a quick, immediate, tangible effect

Then you said:

STD clinics and prevention, with the infrastructure required for providing both, along with providing money for the 1.3 million people that already work in the arts and the peripheral industries related would create jobs yes I'm not sure what's so difficult for you to understand about that.

Because STD Clinics might as well be Chinese Restaurants if you're looking for peripheral effects. They would require buildings, new jobs, infrastructure. There's nothing exclusive about STD Clinics & economic growth and any other job under the sun.

again, that was never said, but feel free to invent things to argue against.
Then what was this little plea to the soul? A reminder to join Oprah's Book Club?

50 million is an absolute pittance, it should be more.

due to the capitalist nature of our society, art has had to commodify itself to get by, and as a result has severely handcuffed itself in regards to what it could do.

I could literally make a thread about this, due to what i got my degree in, where I'm fairly confident I could convince all of you that funding the arts is never a waste, but that would take a lot of energy.

Let me put it this way. The last time the government, during the WPA, seriously subsidized the arts, people like Orson Welles and John Steinbeck were given their chances to do work and be discovered. Can you imagine an American experience without citizen Kain, or Of Mice and Men? Or to put this another way, do you really think that since then, Welles and Steinbeck haven't paid back whatever money was put into the entire arts program during that time?

not only can you not invent a good strawman, but you're note even good at being condescending.

Sure I am.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I said programs without immediate results get cut. Hence my confusion when you followed that up with

Then you said:

then that is my fault for confusing you. I didn't mean for you to confuse immediate job growth with gradual health results, as the two are completely unrelated.

i'll be sure to parse my posts better next time as to avoid problems with your blunt reasoning skills.

Because STD Clinics might as well be Chinese Restaurants if you're looking for peripheral effects. They would require buildings, new jobs, infrastructure. There's nothing exclusive about STD Clinics & economic growth and any other job under the sun.

you mean other things require infrastructure? HOLY poo

Then what was this little plea to the soul? A reminder to join Oprah's Book Club?

a specific example of how an investment in the arts can bring a return from a situation that will probably end up being similar.

if that means to you "magic straw that stirs the drink" then congratulations you're an idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

then that is my fault for confusing you. I didn't mean for you to confuse immediate job growth with gradual health results, as the two are completely unrelated.
It's okay, buddy.

i'll be sure to parse my posts better next time as to avoid problems with your blunt reasoning skills.
Great. Looking forward to it.

you mean other things require infrastructure? HOLY sh*t

Well yeah, but obviously nothing on the grand scale of STD Clinics.

a specific example of how an investment in the arts can bring a return from a situation that will probably end up being similar.
And quite a doozie at that.

if that means to you "magic straw that stirs the drink" then congratulations you're an idiot.

Well hopefully the government can place me with a job in an art studio or AIDS Clinic so I can at least give back to the economy in some way despite my idiocy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

God, you guys have way too much time on your hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

God, you guys have way too much time on your hands.

I'd swear Fiz is Loki if I didn't know better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

a better educated person can do better work, takes care of themselves, costs less in terms of healthcare, commits less crime, is less likely to be a drain on the system, and is generally a better contributor to a society.

I am sure you are correct with a lot of that stuff, but my major issue with the government giving tax breaks for it is this: I think only people who need it for their jobs should even go to college and most people don't actually need a degree to do their jobs, they learn it while on the job or in trade school (in the case of a lot of the guys I worked with at my last place of employment). And far too many jobs these days require degrees when they are 100% meaningless to do the job.

For example, I graduated from college and got a job as a manager at a clothing store for which I had been working as a salesperson while I was in college. So I had the work experience and high performance evaluation necessary to earn the job as manager. But they required a 4 year college degree to promote me to manager. They did not care ONE IOTA what field of study it was in. I could at least SEMI understand it if it were a requirement to have a fashion related degree but it wasn't. A college degree to work for a sh*ttastic starting salary as one of three retail sales managers at a single location in a clothing store? Are you kidding me? My salary was parallel to that of a manager at McDonalds. It was uber silly.

When I was working at my last company, they required a 4 year college degree (again, not caring if it was in cooking, astronomy, basketweaving or whatever) to answer phone calls in the customer service department and to make collections calls. Both were entry level positions with entry level salaries. Both jobs provided the actual education you needed to do the job with paid training of 6 weeks and 4 weeks at your entry level salary rate respectively. Why require a 4 year college degree when it was 100% superfluous? A parent spends that kind of scratch or a student gets that much in loan debt and/or scholarship dough to do a job you can be trained to do in 6 weeks if you are of even average intelligence? If you are college educated and in a good economy have to "settle for that type of job, then your degree isn't necessary for the type of work you are suited for...period. I just think the whole system is effed up majorly.

Oddly enough, most of the HS educated/trade school educated guys at my last job FAR, FAR outearned me (as did my HS graduate only husband) and none of them had a college degree while I do. Why? Because my degree is a fluff type one job wise and they have actual skills that make them able to do their jobs well. And they went to actual continuing education that helped them get better in their day jobs (but yet I fought constantly and unsuccessfully with our corporate education office for them to get their classes reimbursed by our company which reimbursed people for getting masters degrees that had nothing to do with THEIR jobs and after which they usually quit to work elsewhere because they were then TOO EDUCATED for their current job...thanks for the free masters chumps..., but I digress). I have a friend who had at the time about 30 years as an HVAC engineer and had run his own HVAC business for quite awhile and was EXCELLENT at his job yet he had no degree and had a helluva time finding another job because of only that reason. I mean in an HVAC field requiring a 4 year college degree and being BLIND to a guy's immense knowledge and experience and great references? Surely you agree that something is wrong with a system that does that? I don't deny companies' rights to require what they want to degree wise, I just think it is small minded to foster that mentality. Change has to start somewhere, and not giving taxpayer dollars to it may help spark changing that mentality.

I really think any government funded programs should lean more to more JOB/SKILLS related education (IE vo-ed type schools and expansion of such) than COLLEGE DEGREE related ones. I truly believe that relaxing the REQUIREMENT of degrees for jobs that have nothing to do with having a degree along with providing that type of practical job education would likely lead to people being more productive in the workforce and therefore help the economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think that the college degree thing is more about your ability to complete a task like that and less on the specific knowledge gained. The ability to complete 4 years of college while most kids are focused on sex, drugs and rock and roll is not overrated to me. Also, most job descriptions I used to see had "or work equivalent" added to the requirement.

Tech jobs like mine definitely make better use of tech/trade education, but there are a lot of jobs that benefit from a more general education. And of course, there are a LOT of programs for tech/voc education out there, and I am sure that any "college stimulus" program would indeed include these schools.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I get your point about finishing a task..but couldn't that be shown through interview questions just as well? I worked in HR also and interviewed candidates and know that I posed questions that would reveal that.

When I said voc ed I meant HS as well...this proposition was just for parental tax credit for pursual of college degrees, unless I misunderstood it.

Actually I have a beef with HS curricula as well. I don't think they offer practical things like how to interview for a job, how to balance a check book how to write resumes, etc. Especially the way the family unit has deteriorated even since I was in HS thus rendering it less likely they have a chance to learn this at home, I would think those skills would help kids a lot more than the type of silly electives we had in school like DEATH AND DYING or QUEST..SELF ESTEEM. Yes I get the "well rounded student" thing (whether I believe those types of classes are what should be meant by that phrase is another thing)...but I see no reason not to try to make it more practical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

College is still a goal for parents to give their kids. Tech school/military is option #2. Given a preference, and all I have alluded to above, I still want to send my daughter to college.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

God, you guys have way too much time on your hands.

Not that you'd know anything about it, but having thougtful posts takes time and usually takes up more than one line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Not that you'd know anything about it, but having thougtful posts takes time and usually takes up more than one line.

thoughtful, CH...thoughtful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Not that you'd know anything about it, but having thougtful posts takes time and usually takes up more than one line.

Yep ... I have a job and a life ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites