OT Economics

wrote:
snip
So the conclusion I take away from all this is that we need fewer of the
John Allen Paulos sort, heaping scorn upon the populace and browbeating
everyone about how lazy-minded and stupid they are, and more of KC Cole,
reminding us that there are good reasons why many things - which might be
quite logical once you understand them - do not necessarily come to us
naturally, and this does not make us idiots.

Amen to that, Joyce! What often impresses me in my work at a
university's computer science department is how the most internationally
successful scientists are also never condescending or impatient if you
don't understand what they're talking about (or at least don't show it).
They make great teachers, too.

But I've met people who try to invite me to make fun of others who don't
happen to speak any other language than their home language. I
especially remember one young scientist who happens to know English
pretty well. He tried to make jokes about how poorly Finns write English
while another young scientist that I'd been helping with his English was
standing right next to us. I was so embarrassed for the joker and sensed
the other one stiffening in preparation, and then relieved that I didn't
join in the joking.

--
Marina, Miranda and Caliban.
In loving memory of Frank and Nikki.

outsider wrote in
:

Are you trying to say that calcualtors existed when you were in high
school? Are you sure you're not thinking of an abacus?

My dad was using slide rules when I was a kid (60's and 70's) and I recall
he had a nifty circular (disk-shaped) slide rule. Slide rules remained
useful at the advent of the calculator revolution as they were better at
transcendentals, while the early calculators were only 4-function unless
you were quite wealthy.

Nomen Nescio wrote in
:

So I'd tend to think that the loss of proportional sense represents a
de-evolution
of the human brain.

But does that make someone an "idiot".
I'd say, without a doubt, the answer is YES
and..........no.

Thomas Sowell once said "The people who are scariest to me are the
people who don't even know enough to realize how little they know."

In general terms, I'll use that as my standard for "Idiot".

And where this really hurts us is in economics (to drag us back on topic).
The Federal budget is measured now in trillions, and proportions are very
important. I'll hear on the news about something affecting "millions" or
costing that much, but no mention of per-capita units. Things sound scary
in absolute terms, and many don't understand the issue of needing to
represent it proportional to population. You get evil things like zero-
tolerance laws from that, in fields from mind-altering drug use to product
quality.

On Feb 17, 2:15*pm, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
wrote:
outsider wrote:
"Matthew" wrote in
ng.com:

Nomen *Why would most adults need to know how to make change *they are
taught by their teenage jobs like McDonalds that pictures are more
important but they still get the order wrong ;-)

I know when I was in school *My father God rest his soul told me if I
ever used calculator for simple math I would regret it. *And for
higher math I better bring a lot of paper. *I had a math teacher
complain that I was taking too much time doing problems and I refused
to use a calculator. *My dad told him why you mad that he can work it
out and you can't. *I got transferred out of that class quick

scary fact that men when given changed 95% of the time don't look at
the change part only the dollar amount

Are you trying to say that calcualtors existed when you were in high
school? *Are you sure you're not thinking of an abacus?

Well, they certainly EXISTED when I was in high-school, but they
definitely were not allowed in any math classroom!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The calculator I remember on my father's desk at tax time certainly
wouldn't
have been allowed at school. It would have taken an entire seat on the
bus.
You could have killed an intruder with it, that is, if you had enough
muscle to actually lift it high enough.

Sherry

On Feb 17, 10:55*pm, Marina wrote:
wrote:

snip

So the conclusion I take away from all this is that we need fewer of the
John Allen Paulos sort, heaping scorn upon the populace and browbeating
everyone about how lazy-minded and stupid they are, and more of KC Cole,
reminding us that there are good reasons why many things - which might be
quite logical once you understand them - do not necessarily come to us
naturally, and this does not make us idiots.

Amen to that, Joyce! What often impresses me in my work at a
university's computer science department is how the most internationally
successful scientists are also never condescending or impatient if you
don't understand what they're talking about (or at least don't show it).
They make great teachers, too.

But I've met people who try to invite me to make fun of others who don't
happen to speak any other language than their home language. I
especially remember one young scientist who happens to know English
pretty well. He tried to make jokes about how poorly Finns write English
while another young scientist that I'd been helping with his English was
standing right next to us. I was so embarrassed for the joker and sensed
the other one stiffening in preparation, and then relieved that I didn't
join in the joking.

--
Marina, Miranda and Caliban.
In loving memory of Frank and Nikki.

That's because you're kind. I suppose we could go on whether that's
a genetic, or left-brained, or right-brained trait; or whether it's
environmenal. :-)

Sherry

Marina wrote:

wrote:

So the conclusion I take away from all this is that we need fewer of the
John Allen Paulos sort, heaping scorn upon the populace and browbeating
everyone about how lazy-minded and stupid they are, and more of KC Cole,
reminding us that there are good reasons why many things - which might be
quite logical once you understand them - do not necessarily come to us
naturally, and this does not make us idiots.

Amen to that, Joyce! What often impresses me in my work at a
university's computer science department is how the most internationally
successful scientists are also never condescending or impatient if you
don't understand what they're talking about (or at least don't show it).
They make great teachers, too.

That is definitely an important part of being a good teacher, I agree.

But I've met people who try to invite me to make fun of others who don't
happen to speak any other language than their home language. I
especially remember one young scientist who happens to know English
pretty well. He tried to make jokes about how poorly Finns write English
while another young scientist that I'd been helping with his English was
standing right next to us. I was so embarrassed for the joker and sensed
the other one stiffening in preparation, and then relieved that I didn't
join in the joking.

That's nasty, to act like that right in front of someone's face.

I had a friend in college, more like a study and project partner, who
was like this. She wasn't mean to people directly, but she liked to talk
in disparaging ways about how smart she was and how stupid most other
people were. And she often tried to engage me in conspiratory conversation
by implying that *we* were better than other people. I wanted no part of
that! It wasn't even that I was too pious to act that way. I just didn't
want to validate that way of thinking - I've been on the receiving end of
that kind of attitude too often. Besides, with someone like that, you make
the cut one day, and the next day you don't, and I certainly didn't want
a relationship based on my having to prove that I was good enough. So I
just didn't bite.

Oh, well, we were young. She was very young, probably about 21 or so.
I guess I can cut her some slack. Hopefully she's grown out of that
by now!

--
Joyce ^..^

(To email me, remove the X's from my user name.)

ScratchMonkey wrote:
outsider wrote in
:

Are you trying to say that calcualtors existed when you were in high
school? Are you sure you're not thinking of an abacus?

My dad was using slide rules when I was a kid (60's and 70's) and I recall
he had a nifty circular (disk-shaped) slide rule. Slide rules remained
useful at the advent of the calculator revolution as they were better at
transcendentals, while the early calculators were only 4-function unless
you were quite wealthy.



Back in 1944 I worked for two lawyers. They had a nifty calculator. It
stood on a pedestal and was heavy iron and about 16X16 inches. It had
multiple rows. Once your number keys were pushed in you had to pull a
handle down to activate it. Grocery stores had hand operated adding
machines too. That is how they added the grocery ;list. Adding
machines like that were still in use in the 50s. MLB

"MLB" wrote in message
...
ScratchMonkey wrote:
outsider wrote in
:

Are you trying to say that calcualtors existed when you were in high
school? Are you sure you're not thinking of an abacus?

My dad was using slide rules when I was a kid (60's and 70's) and I
recall he had a nifty circular (disk-shaped) slide rule. Slide rules
remained useful at the advent of the calculator revolution as they were
better at transcendentals, while the early calculators were only
4-function unless you were quite wealthy.



Back in 1944 I worked for two lawyers. They had a nifty calculator. It
stood on a pedestal and was heavy iron and about 16X16 inches. It had
multiple rows. Once your number keys were pushed in you had to pull a
handle down to activate it. Grocery stores had hand operated adding
machines too. That is how they added the grocery ;list. Adding machines
like that were still in use in the 50s. MLB

I used to have one of those as a display item in one of my stores. Dang
thing was heavy. It had special pixel etched on keys one was for a milk
jug, one was corn, one was an apple. it must have been from a farm country
store. I donated it when the stores closed

Matthew wrote:
"MLB" wrote in message
...
ScratchMonkey wrote:
outsider wrote in
:

Are you trying to say that calcualtors existed when you were in high
school? Are you sure you're not thinking of an abacus?
My dad was using slide rules when I was a kid (60's and 70's) and I
recall he had a nifty circular (disk-shaped) slide rule. Slide rules
remained useful at the advent of the calculator revolution as they were
better at transcendentals, while the early calculators were only
4-function unless you were quite wealthy.


Back in 1944 I worked for two lawyers. They had a nifty calculator. It
stood on a pedestal and was heavy iron and about 16X16 inches. It had
multiple rows. Once your number keys were pushed in you had to pull a
handle down to activate it. Grocery stores had hand operated adding
machines too. That is how they added the grocery ;list. Adding machines
like that were still in use in the 50s. MLB

I used to have one of those as a display item in one of my stores. Dang
thing was heavy. It had special pixel etched on keys one was for a milk
jug, one was corn, one was an apple. it must have been from a farm country
store. I donated it when the stores closed

++++
I wonder how it wold be priced on Antiques Roadshow? MLB

wrote in news:499c6ffd$0$1671
:

Besides, with someone like that, you make the cut one day, and the
next day you don't, and I certainly didn't want a relationship based
on my having to prove that I was good enough. So I just didn't bite.

Would you like the person who doesn't make the cut as your surgeon? How
about as the guy who makes the most important decisions for your bank or
your investments?

I don't separate the "smart" from the "stupid" (which is always field-
specific!) because I want to make fun of anyone. I do so because I want
qualified people doing my important jobs.

Because we live in a democracy, the "intelligence" of the majority is what
controls the quality of the decisions our government makes, and widespread
innumeracy means that our government is going to make poor decisions about
things involving numbers, which includes science and economics.