OT: First Day at School

But I spoke the truth >:-} ...Jim Thompson

Ask them what "1+2*3" is.

Far too few get it right. Far too few think to ask where the brackets are. Far too many are disconcerted when you say "none, just using the normal laws of arithmetic"

This "new math* (aka BAD math) has been going on for some time.

Around 1980 our oldest daughter is having problems coping with Calculus in high school.

When I try to help her I'm baffled by the nomenclature.

So I arrange a meeting with the teacher... also last name Thompson, poor bastard.

So I go in one evening to meet this "teacher", and he tries to snow me... half-way thru his "presentation" I finally grasp the "new" nomenclature these idiots are using to confuse parents.

So I jump up to the blackboard and finish the example.

Teacher turns pale >:-}

Daughter never had another problem understanding Calculus ;-) ...Jim Thompson

Was it just nomenclature or was it a change of method? I'm glad I learned 'new math' arithmetic but never realized it was new calculus too.

The Calculus case was just renaming procedures in such a way to totally confuse even a parent with Calculus experience (such as me with 7 semesters worth at MIT ;-)

I've run into "new math" _method_ issues while assisting grandchildren; and teachers that would absolutely _not_ allow the "old-fashioned" way.

So I struggled thru getting the _bad_ method across, but instructed the grandchild to check their work the "old-fashioned" way ;-)

Casting out 9's really upset one teacher >:-} ...Jim Thompson

Investment bankers and leftist politicans would say "1+2*3" is 25, maybe even 30. By leveraging the leverage that's already leveraged. Until the bubble pops again. Now the reps seem to become similar. "Let's just blow past 20 trillion and all be happy".

Exactly. So they can indoctrinate them with Socialist concepts of enforced "equality" and "diversity" from the get-go. Bastards.

So you wouldn't be happy for her to play alongside the offspring of someone like... oh, I don't know....just to take one random example... Bill Sloman? Very wise. :->

Actually a poor accountant will answer "9", a mediocre accountant "7", and a good accountant "what do you want it to be?".

Not to worry! Isn't Bill a eunuch ?>:-}

Plus I'm quite sure he is your classic blowhard... lots of noise, but no income. ...Jim Thompson

This is _not_ a government school... it's private, cash-on-the-barrel-head funding. Don't like the instruction... walk. ...Jim Thompson

Certainly no *earned* income, I would guess!

-- This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

If only *all* schools were that way... Sigh...

-- This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

Good guess. He's been unemployable for decades. Surprised? I didn't think so.

No off-spring, but eight nieces and nephews (all with tertiary qualificatio ns) and about ten grand-nieces and nephews, some of whom are old enough to be in "good" secondary schools - meaning that their parents pay fees to kee p them there. I have my doubts about the nature of the education they may b e getting, but they'll probably be well-enough taught to get into one the l ocal universities or the like for tertiary education.

I think Jim has got worse things to worry about. What he should be worrying about is US inequality, which is doing bad things for the US social fabric (and Jim represents quite a few of them).

For one thing, Jim's American exceptionalism blinds him to fact that the US A suffers from dangerous levels of inequality.

You, on the other hand, haven't got the attention span required to follow t he argument, which isn't going to make it into the pages of the Daily Mail. A google search suggests that it never has.

Jim-out-of-touch-with-reality-Thomson making the same mistake as Dan.

He hasn't noticed that I have a regular subscription to the "New Yorker" wh ich may not be evidence of wealth, but is clear evidence of enough money fo r occasional self-indulgence. My annual trips to Europe are equally evidenc e of financial sufficiency. I do pay for them myself.

Depends how you regard pension income. I'd argue that I earned it when I was working. I was certainly paying out then so that I could collect it later (which I am doing).

On Saturday, September 9, 2017 at 11:42:14 PM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@ieee.org wrot e:

which may not be evidence of wealth, but is clear evidence of enough money for occasional self-indulgence. My annual trips to Europe are equally evide nce of financial sufficiency. I do pay for them myself.

And what mistake would that be?

Dan

ote:

" which may not be evidence of wealth, but is clear evidence of enough mone y for occasional self-indulgence. My annual trips to Europe are equally evi dence of financial sufficiency. I do pay for them myself.

The idea that he could estimate my income from what I talk about. Quite a l ot of gossip is devoted to establishing social status by the speaker making references to particular sorts of expenditure and activity. I know perfect ly well that I do it, but the references aren't to stuff that Jim or you pi ck up on (and it may be to stuff that neither of you care about).