Originally Posted by
Domisoldo
We're in violent agreement then. You've indeed pushed my economic success-dick endowment analogy too far.
Perhaps I won't use humor next time, as it offends some stern members.
How about the A student being forced to lower her grade to an A- and an A- college so that the C- student can pass?
...and I am not talking about the A students who cheated their way to the grade or just got extremely lucky and guessed the answers right.
Why? Is "grade" a finite resource?
Amazing the logic of some people. Of course grade in an infinite source inless the teacher decided to quantify it as finite in whch it is the teacher not the studnet's fault to see their letter lowered.
I am a retired teacher, I never lowered anyone's grade to help others. I did this though.
There is a 20 point test. That means that I should count off 5 points per question. But the grades are low so I count of only four. What how this kind of help does not increase the A's, does not take away anyone's grade and some are helped that need it
Not Curved Curved
0 100 100
-1 95 96
-2 90 92
-3 85 88
-4 80 84
-5 75 80
-6 70 76
-7 65 72
-8 60 68
-10 55 64
-11 50 60
-12 46 56
If as is in my state the mandated grading scale is 90-100 A; 80-89 B; 70-79 C; 60-69 D; and 59 and below F, see what happens with this kind of curve? No one is hurt and some are helped.
Missing just one or two is still an A on this scale. It isn't until mising four or five does it matter on the B's So this kind of "curve is NOT going to inflate the A's and B;s.
It might reduce the number of F's significan'tly. What is actually does is allow 50 to be a D.
Are the two scales equal. NO. Are they fair. That depends on the test and the students. Review test that has been reviewed and reviewed it isn't not only equal but not fair. Bit if it is brand new material, the student who this is rteally true new information is at a handicap with the student whose parnets have already taught this information at home.
on the first test student A makes a 90 on basic math skills Studnet B makes a 65. After intensive review Student A makes a 90 showing no new learning, but student B has moved to a 100 on the last skills test.
So what is equal. Student A gets a 90 A and Studnet B gets an 83 B for a final grade.
Or would it be fair since this is a skills comprehensive skills test to just give each studnet the highest score they made on the four basic skills tests they took over the two weeks. That would mean Student A get a 90 A and Student B gets a 100 A. but what about that 65?
What about ti? If we are being truly fair the grade should reflect what the studnet knows know after the unit is over.
I use the analogy to show that it is impossible to always show what is equal and what is fair.
Mimimum wage earner only has to pay $200 a month for universal health care.
His boss pays $1000 a month for his health care. Both have identically the same coverage.
So which is fair and which is equal and can both be true at the same time. I doubt it.
The minimumg wage guy is paying exactly 20 percent of his income on universal health care. His boss is also paying exactly 20 per cent of his wage on universal health care. He makes five times as much as the minimum hour wage worker.
Or should the minimum wage guy have to pay 20 pecent )$200) of what he makes to get universal health care while his boss also pays $200 which for him is only 4 per cent of his income.
There is no way to successfully reconcile this difference to both guys when we talk about what is fair
Shold the wealthy help make it possible so that both the rich guy and the poor guy pay the same per cent as each other or should they pay the same amount of money or as some have tried to do cut it somewhere in the middle?
Any one claiming to have a scientific law of what is equal fair and right about how to proceed about this is talking foolishness if they speak as if there is some scientific law of nature that presumes what is always as in always correct.
My political belief is that we have to cut it in the middle to some degree. Having the rich paying only 5 percent of their income for health care and to poor guy paying 20 % so that they both are paying $200 a month doesn't seem fair.
Neither does making the richer guy pay $1000 for heath care while the poor guy gets by with only $200 a month seem fair either.
There has to be a meeting some where. Since there aere so many more of the minimum wage guys as as their are bosses it isn't as simple as adding the two togeter and cut it down the middle.
That is why sales tax is not fair. The poor person has to (shall we say) spend a total of 10 percent of his income on necesssities, meaning 10 pecent sales tax on his income. but the rich guy squrills away most of his income in the bank which makes even more money for him. So he only pays 2 percent of his income as sales income tax. That is very unfair to the poor people.
It isn't about spreading the wealth. It is about providing some decency in incomes we pay our citizens in the richest nation in the world. If the very rich pay slightly more than the poor in taxes, the tradeoff is immeasurable. With all the people getting basic services, opportunities to health care, education advancement, crime will go down. Welfare payments will go down and guess what the rich people's tax burden will decline as well.
Discuss it all you want, but true or false, correct, fair, adequate, best for the nation are all political terms that are used at will to camouflage what may be the real stories underneath.