Al Bundy;1573932 wrote:Footwedge, just for entertainment purposes, will you try to do math?

800 on my SAT's in math. Gut has no chance against me. Percentages, prob and stats, and even derivatives, he's not in my league. Did I mention economics?

Footwedge;1573933 wrote:800 on my SAT's in math. Gut has no chance against me. Percentages, prob and stats, and even derivatives, he's not in my league. Did I mention economics?

At least he can count to 16 to calculate playoff spots.

Al Bundy;1573941 wrote:At least he can count to 16 to calculate playoff spots.

I've read several books on the playoffs. I am now an expert on playoffs of all kinds.

Al Bundy;1573784 wrote:There are specific examples of students from below average incomes who have graduated college. The examples show that it can be done. Just because many choose not to take that path, does not mean that the opportunity is not there.

the outlier is not a defense of a system
Abraham Lincoln was largely an autodidact. Lets do away with all schools.

jmog;1573826 wrote:His label, while not PC, has merit to it.





On average, the smarter people are, the more money they make. It is a direct, linear relationship.

and why does this happen

In examining the opportunity gap between high- and low-income children, it is important to begin at the beginning— birth. The evidence suggests that children of high- and low-income families start out with similar abilities but rapidly diverge in outcomes.
At the earliest ages, there is almost no difference in cognitive ability between high- and low-income individuals. Figure 4 shows the impact of a family’s socioeconomic status—a combination of income, education, and occupation—on the cognitive ability of infants between eight and twelve months of age, as measured in the Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey. Although it is obviously difficult to measure the cognitive ability of infants, this ECLS metric has been shown to be modestly predictive of IQ at age five (Fryer and Levitt 2013).
Controlling for age, number of siblings, race, and other environmental factors, the effects of socioeconomic status are small and statistically insignificant. A child born into a family in the highest socioeconomic quintile, for example, can expect to score only 0.02 standard deviations higher on a test of cognitive ability than an average child, while one born into a family in the lowest socioeconomic quintile can expect to score about 0.03 standard deviations lower—hardly a measurable difference and statistically insignificant. By contrast, other factors, such as age, gender, and birth order, have a greater impact on abilities at the earliest stages of life.
Despite similar starting points, by age four, children in the highest income quintile score, on average, in the 69th percentile on tests of literacy and mathematics, while children in the lowest income quintile score in the 34th and 32nd percentile, respectively (Waldfogel and Washbrook 2011). Research suggests that these differences arise largely due to factors related to a child’s home environment and family’s socioeconomic status (Fryer and Levitt 2004).
http://www.brookings.edu/research/re...gher-education

gut;1573878 wrote:If you could do the math, you wouldn't be questioning my numbers.

So here's a basic finance test for you...what is the remaining principal balance after 36 payments on a $35k loan over 10 years at 5% interest?

given your record, the numbers you quoted here will be changed, you just can not be trusted with numbers as has been proven.

gut;1573945 wrote:I've read several books on the playoffs. I am now an expert on playoffs of all kinds.

Playoffs are unfair. They reward the teams that work hard and excel. It would be more fair if everyone just went 8-8 and tied for the championship.

isadore;1573951 wrote:given your record, the numbers you quoted here will be changed, you just can not be trusted with numbers as has been proven.

So, in other words, you don't understand the math? You even quoted the numbers of the problem I constructed, so good ahead and give me the answer. That is, unless you were lying about understanding the math.

isadore;1573947 wrote:the outlier is not a defense of a system
Abraham Lincoln was largely an autodidact. Lets do away with all schools.

You only view it as an outlier because you do not understand basic statistics. You incorrectly think that success in school is tied to income. The variables that success in school are related to are work ethic and intelligence. Students who work hard and are smart, do well academically regardless of socio-economic status. You mentioned earlier that you were not able to finish school. That is directly related to your lack of work ethic and below average intelligence. People just say that they didn't go to (or finish) school due to money because it sounds better than telling the truth that they were either a) too lazy, b) not smart enough, or c) both.

Al Bundy;1573955 wrote:Playoffs are unfair. They reward the teams that work hard and excel. It would be more fair if everyone just went 8-8 and tied for the championship.

I don't like sporting contests in general. I think the outcomes are rigged to favor the more talented and well-coached teams.

gut;1573959 wrote:So, in other words, you don't understand the math? You even quoted the numbers of the problem I constructed, so good ahead and give me the answer. That is, unless you were lying about understanding the math.

the math is quite easy to understand. But I don't play against a rigged deck.

Al Bundy;1573962 wrote:You only view it as an outlier because you do not understand basic statistics. You incorrectly think that success in school is tied to income. The variables that success in school are related to are work ethic and intelligence. Students who work hard and are smart, do well academically regardless of socio-economic status. You mentioned earlier that you were not able to finish school. That is directly related to your lack of work ethic and below average intelligence. People just say that they didn't go to (or finish) school due to money because it sounds better than telling the truth that they were either a) too lazy, b) not smart enough, or c) both.

bull, not when you don't get in the door to start with because of finance or you have to leave early because of it.
I did finish school all the way to an MA. Of course that was at a time when college tuition and books was much less than they are today.
Free post secondary education would be a driving engine for the American dream.

isadore;1573986 wrote: I did finish school all the way to an MA.

Master Asshole?

I did not think the short yellow bus drove that far.

Footwedge;1573933 wrote:800 on my SAT's in math. Gut has no chance against me. Percentages, prob and stats, and even derivatives, he's not in my league. Did I mention economics?

Lol, you can't figure out playoff scenarios in the NFL which only takes arithmetic and a little logic, no way you got an 800.

isadore;1573950 wrote:and why does this happen

In examining the opportunity gap between high- and low-income children, it is important to begin at the beginning— birth. The evidence suggests that children of high- and low-income families start out with similar abilities but rapidly diverge in outcomes.
At the earliest ages, there is almost no difference in cognitive ability between high- and low-income individuals. Figure 4 shows the impact of a family’s socioeconomic status—a combination of income, education, and occupation—on the cognitive ability of infants between eight and twelve months of age, as measured in the Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey. Although it is obviously difficult to measure the cognitive ability of infants, this ECLS metric has been shown to be modestly predictive of IQ at age five (Fryer and Levitt 2013).
Controlling for age, number of siblings, race, and other environmental factors, the effects of socioeconomic status are small and statistically insignificant. A child born into a family in the highest socioeconomic quintile, for example, can expect to score only 0.02 standard deviations higher on a test of cognitive ability than an average child, while one born into a family in the lowest socioeconomic quintile can expect to score about 0.03 standard deviations lower—hardly a measurable difference and statistically insignificant. By contrast, other factors, such as age, gender, and birth order, have a greater impact on abilities at the earliest stages of life.
Despite similar starting points, by age four, children in the highest income quintile score, on average, in the 69th percentile on tests of literacy and mathematics, while children in the lowest income quintile score in the 34th and 32nd percentile, respectively (Waldfogel and Washbrook 2011). Research suggests that these differences arise largely due to factors related to a child’s home environment and family’s socioeconomic status (Fryer and Levitt 2004).
http://www.brookings.edu/research/re...gher-education

Wrong.

It it has been proven that one is born with their IQ. One can not change their IQ by more than 4-5 points. So the graph is 100% valid.

Devils Advocate;1574008 wrote:Master Asshole?

I did not think the short yellow bus drove that far.

gosh a ruddies what a bitter little man you must be.

jmog;1574050 wrote:Wrong.

It it has been proven that one is born with their IQ. One can not change their IQ by more than 4-5 points. So the graph is 100% valid.

brookings institutue>jmog

isadore;1573983 wrote:the math is quite easy to understand. But I don't play against a rigged deck.

Yes, it is easy to do the math. You, however, apparently can not do such simple math. That makes you the one and only liar in this thread, and also explains why you are so incapable of understanding this topic.

There's no shame in being ignorant, only in choosing to remain so. Embrace the wisdom & education (for free!) people have generously given you in this thread.

gut;1574164 wrote:Yes, it is easy to do the math. You, however, apparently can not do such simple math. That makes you the one and only liar in this thread, and also explains why you are so incapable of understanding this topic.

There's no shame in being ignorant, only in choosing to remain so. Embrace the wisdom & education (for free!) people have generously given you in this thread.

Let me illustrate to you what lying is, since ethics and morality were not part of your education or upbringing.
You wrote at
8:27 PM 1/27/14

gut wrote: Average debt among graduates is $29k and starting salaries was just over $44k.

228# 8:27 PM 1/27/14
Then the next day at 11:22 AM 1/28/14
You made up this yearly average in order to falsely justify depriving needy students the education they so richly deserve.

gut wrote:With average starting salaries over $50k, $30k in average debt is really no big deal. For comparison sake, a gross income of $50k would easily qualify you for a $200k mortgage.

316#
Your continuing worry about the amount rich have to pay for their education while you are indifferent to those with less resources, shows compassion was another part of your upbringing that was ignored.

Isadore is the only one in this thread lying - claims he understands math and finance but clearly does not.

It's ok - the world needs ditch diggers, too. Let go of the bitterness and embrace mediocrity!

Al Bundy;1573955 wrote:Playoffs are unfair. They reward the teams that work hard and excel. It would be more fair if everyone just went 8-8 and tied for the championship.

gosh a ruddies lets look at America's most successful sport, professional football in this SuperBowl week.
to give all the teams have a real chance to be competitive
they share revenue from tv and licensing.
they set an upper cap on salaries
they have a draft of college players with the team with the worst record getting first choice.

gut;1574176 wrote:Isadore is the only one in this thread lying - claims he understands math and finance but clearly does not.

It's ok - the world needs ditch diggers, too. Let go of the bitterness and embrace mediocrity!

gosh a ruddies embrace honesty and compassion. They are good for the soul if you have one.

isadore;1574185 wrote:gosh a ruddies embrace honesty ....

...take your own advice and share with us how you will follow follow through with your declearation of registering at the college who will provide up to 100% school loan relief if the student is not employed at a defined income level.

isadore;1574185 wrote:gosh a ruddies embrace honesty and compassion. They are good for the soul if you have one.

math and finance are good for informed opinions, if you care to have one

jmog;1574048 wrote:Lol, you can't figure out playoff scenarios in the NFL which only takes arithmetic and a little logic, no way you got an 800.

You want to relive history there Clem? The playoff thread had nothing to do with math. It had everything to do with me forgetting about Baltimore when deciphering the playoff scenario.. Again, I'll put up my math skills...especially percentages, probability and statistics with anyone here. And btw, you think it's right that you pay zero federal taxes just because you have 4 kids? Only a flaming liberal could justify that for an excuse to avoid paying federal taxes.