|
0 members (),
321
guests, and
10
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007 |
Capitalism is fixed, now. Oh, wait-- was that a complete thought? Thought it might have been a typo and was waiting for the edit and ending to that sentence. Bated breath, even.  Of course it's a complete thought. Ben Bernake has fixed the problem. The stock market is going up again, isn't it? So capitalism is working and people can be happy and do happy things that make happiness again so that... So that, uh, um, er... Well, no matter. The Fed is absolutely amazing! Awesome! Superlative! Even, dare I say it? Gifted!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
Must be because of superior, well-monetized parenting.
THERE. Finally. I was really worried about staying on topic.
Thank you, Jon.
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
I guess even superior parenting doesn't always produce lovely results, though. Perhaps socialized losses are the underachieving sibling.
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,007 |
I guess even superior parenting doesn't always produce lovely results, though. Perhaps socialized losses are the underachieving sibling. However, if you don't flood your progeny with massive amounts of liquidity, aren't you essentially guaranteeing failure? And, while you might not succeed in raising a (truly intrinsically valuable) power child, you need to do whatever is in your power to avoid what we could term a "terminal unsuccess catastrophe". Basically, you are putting a floor under junior so that he doesn't fall into the middle class.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 |
However, if you don't flood your progeny with massive amounts of liquidity, aren't you essentially guaranteeing failure? A recent study has found that beyond a certain level, parental transfers to college students can hurt their grades: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/...tal-support-college-results-lower-gradesSpoiled Children January 14, 2013 - 3:00am Inside Higher Education By Scott Jaschik Much discussion about higher education assumes that the children of wealthy parents have all the advantages, and they certainly have many. But a new study reveals an area where they may be at a disadvantage. The study found that the more money (in total and as a share of total college costs) that parents provide for higher education, the lower the grades their children earn.
The findings -- particularly grouped with other work by the researcher who made them -- suggest that the students least likely to excel are those who receive essentially blank checks for college expenses.
The study -- "More Is More or More Is Less?" -- is by Laura Hamilton, an assistant professor in the School of Social Sciences, Humanities and Arts at the University of California at Merced, and was just published by the American Sociological Review (abstract available here), the flagship journal of the American Sociological Association.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,856
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,856 |
Businesses are run to profit their owners, but they do so (by and large) by producing efficiently what people want. That is no more problematic than workers choosing jobs and consumers choosing products to maximize their own welfare. I don't see why the pursuit of self-interest by some economic actors and not others should be criticized. It's problematic because scale. Imagine the damage each economic actor can inflict on the environment and economy in terms of explosive yield: 1 worker = 1 firecracker 1 small business = 1 stick dynamite 1 large business = 1 pound C4 1 publicly-traded corporation = 1 bunker buster 1 global corporation = 1 nuclear bomb And now you know why 2007 looked so much like economic nuclear winter.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,777
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,777 |
.
i know that this standz for something
the dollar sign?for a great deal. it stands on the vest of every fat, pig like figure in every cartoon for the purpose of denoting a crook, a scoundrel-as the one sure fire brand of evil. it stands as the money of a free country- for achievement, for success, for ability, for man's creative power. incidentally, do you know where that sign comes from? it stands for the initials of the united states. the united states is the only country in history that used its own monogram as a symbol of depravity. it was the only country in history where wealth was acquired not by looting, but by production, not by force, but by trade, the only country whose money was the symbol of man's right to his own mind, to his work, to his life, to his happiness, to himself. end rant
Youth lives by personality, age lives by calculation. -- Aristotle on a calendar
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 10
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 10 |
Hmm, given the heavy overlap between introversion and highly gifted, and that there is a strong correlation between being introverted and being intrinsically motivated, and that scores (SAT, income, car brand, etc.) and grades are extrinsic motivations, I see a lot of interesting questions to research. I came across this Washington Post article a couple weeks ago. It says that extreme introverts tend to flounder in leadership positions, but extreme extroverts are also unsuccessful. Apparently, extroverts talk too much and listen too little. Who knew? The article goes on to say that good leaders need to be somewhere in the middle: ambiverts. It also says that most people, in general, actually are ambiverts; on a scale of 1-7, 1 being most introverted and 7 being most extroverted, most people score a 3 or 4. I would imagine that extremely introverted HG adults would avoid high-profile leadership positions. But more moderately introverted HG adults might find the work to be challenging and intrinsically rewarding enough to tolerate the less-enjoyable social aspects of those jobs. In my personal experience, I have seen a few HG introverts take up leadership positions simply because they were sick of being managed by less competent people. If you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. This is somewhat tangential, but I have also seen that some introverted HG adults have spending habits that look like conspicuous consumption. But really, disposable income + discriminating taste = nice things. Those nice things are purchased for personal enjoyment, not for the purposes of impressing other people. For some well-off people, it can actually be rather embarrassing to realize that other people watch what you buy / covet what you have.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,856
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,856 |
.
i know that this standz for something
the dollar sign?for a great deal. it stands on the vest of every fat, pig like figure in every cartoon for the purpose of denoting a crook, a scoundrel-as the one sure fire brand of evil. it stands as the money of a free country- for achievement, for success, for ability, for man's creative power. incidentally, do you know where that sign comes from? it stands for the initials of the united states. the united states is the only country in history that used its own monogram as a symbol of depravity. it was the only country in history where wealth was acquired not by looting, but by production, not by force, but by trade, the only country whose money was the symbol of man's right to his own mind, to his work, to his life, to his happiness, to himself. end rant Were you trying to illustrate Ayn Rand's shocking ignorance of US history?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
