US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1499

On December 02 2014 20:13 Silvanel wrote:
In Poland in 198X and 199X second grade school (15-19 years old) program included basis of integration, differential equations and complex numbers. It was deemed to hard and those parts were removed. Nothing significant wasnt added in its place. Still the percent of people having problems with math didnt actualy fall, but it went up. I personaly atribute this to rising acceptance of failing at math. Parents saw that in new capitalist society knowldge is not as necessary as before and therefore lowered their expectations. Failing at math have become socialy acceptable and thus the childrens results plummeted.

On December 02 2014 20:12 paralleluniverse wrote:
Moreover, any sort of application of math at primary or secondary level would be so artificial and convoluted, unrealistic, and boring, that it detracts from the joy of learning math. Mathematical theory is beautiful, even at high school level, both calculus and pre-calculus are remarkable enough and interesting enough to stand alone. The connection between trigonometry and complex numbers via Euler's formula, or the fact that the area under the curve is the inverse operation to finding the slope of a curve, or the connection between set theory and probability theory, are all remarkable and interesting and no contrived applications is needed to teach and appreciate these amazing facts.

On December 02 2014 20:12 paralleluniverse wrote:
However, I don't buy the notion that we need more mathematicians or STEM majors or mathematically-literate people. In economics, prices--including the price of labor--adjusts so that supply equates to demand (unless there's some form of price control or rigidity preventing price adjustment). So if there is a shortage of STEM skill, then show me the money. I don't see the wage of people with STEM skills going through the roof. Indeed, the more mathematically stupid the general population is, the higher my wage should climb.

Thus, I see little compelling evidence that people failing in math, is somehow worse for society than people failing at, say, dance or music.

On December 02 2014 20:23 paralleluniverse wrote:

Look at Asian students, particularly those in secondary school who have studied in Asian countries and then switched to a Western country and find math easy in their new Western school, because the curriculum is about a year behind Asian countries. In my experience, they don't end up being smarter at math. America and Western countries in general still produces the best mathematicians. So removing difficult things from the secondary school math curriculum doesn't appear to have any detrimental effect. You will still learn about integration and differential equations, if not in secondary school, then in university if you choose to study math (if you don't, then you don't need to know).

On December 02 2014 19:13 silynxer wrote:
Note that I am involved with math at the university level as well and not only can I see that this attitude is the norm for mathematicians, I myself had (or even have) the same gut reaction towards this kind of new math. Once you understand something it becomes difficult to relate to how someone else could not understand it. Because we try to do everything as general and abstract as possible, we tend to think that this is the best way for everyone. However, that most children at the beginning have a fundamentally different approach seems not only possible but very likely.*

As mathematically inclined people we should realize that we are not the norm and ask ourselves why this is the case.

*This holds even at the university level. I have seen professors using way too abstract concepts in introductory classes and then be proud when 50% fail the exam after the majority already dropped the class.

On December 02 2014 14:18 Danglars wrote:
Reality: Parent's support of common core dropped 18% in one year (Rasmussen)
New York was one of the early adopters of the program. It's African American students in third grade that scored "below standard" in English has grown from 15.5% to 50%. In seventh grade, the same underachiever grouping grew from 16.5% to 70%.

(But I'm sure this is just consequences of a change, and not anything about the program itself ... of course)

If we were to evaluate its effects thus far, it would not receive a passing grade. We can argue pedagogy all day long. This particular conception of it appears to be idiotic, no need to bend reality to suit needs. The math portion is frequently put into concrete visual representations, yours and my anathema. Forced compliance from state-down forces the selection of these books and these styles, and parent's can't help with their kid's frustrations (most famously, Louis CK's) and it breeds and festers.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration will convene a panel Tuesday to review its lifetime ban on blood donations from men who have had sex with a male partner — a policy that has been in place since 1983 but that advocates and public health experts say is outdated and discriminatory.

With the rise of the AIDS epidemic in the early 1980s, the FDA moved to bar blood donations from all men who had engaged in same-sex intercourse in or after 1977 — the year the epidemic began in the U.S.

At that time, men who engaged in homosexual sex were the most severely hit by HIV infection. The virus was poorly understood and the prognosis for sufferers was grim, with most dying shortly after developing AIDS — a far cry from its current status as a disease that can be managed with a diligent regimen of anti-retroviral therapy (ART). In addition, the first HIV blood test wasn’t licensed until 1985.

So while a lifetime ban on blood donation for men who have sex with men — a population often abbreviated to MSM in public health discussions — may have been prudent at the time in the United States, other countries such as Australia, Canada, Italy and the United Kingdom have since lifted their bans in favor of a system that requires that MSM blood donors abstain from sex for a period of time, usually year or more, before they can give.

“Evidence form Italy, the U.K., Canada and the like all suggest that the FDA’s current policy is an overreaction,” said I. Glenn Cohen, a professor at Harvard Law School and faculty director of the school’s Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology and Bioethics. “I think it’s really more or less a no-brainer that they should move to the 12-month deferral.”

On November 28 2014 01:46 Simberto wrote:
Show nested quote +


Also, wouldn't it in that case be a better idea to try to fix the gap between social strata instead of arming the police with assault rifles and APCs so they can keep them down?

However, I don't buy the notion that we need more mathematicians or STEM majors or mathematically-literate people. In economics, prices--including the price of labor--adjusts so that supply equates to demand (unless there's some form of price control or rigidity preventing price adjustment). So if there is a shortage of STEM skill, then show me the money. I don't see the wage of people with STEM skills going through the roof. Indeed, the more mathematically stupid the general population is, the higher my wage should climb.

Thus, I see little compelling evidence that people failing in math, is somehow worse for society than people failing at, say, dance or music.

On December 03 2014 05:04 QuanticHawk wrote:
I know that, but the same can happen to hetero people. While gays do have higher rates of infection than straight people, black people are also by far have the highest rates of infection among ethnicities. Depending where you read, something like 40%+ of all new cases in the states are from black people (who account for ~12% of the population) There's not any kind of limitation on people from at risk ethnicities donating.

On December 03 2014 05:06 DeepElemBlues wrote:


It would, if poverty caused crime. It doesn't. That's been proven for over 50 years now. Need does not cause crime. Greed does.

On December 03 2014 05:46 Nyxisto wrote:


But the differences are insane. Homosexual males make up about two percent of the population but are responsible for about 60-70% of new HIV infections. This coupled with the infection window make the group incredibly risky blood donors. Also if you'd try to seperate blood donors by ethnicity even if the risk statistics would warrant it from a medical standpoint you'd probably have insane political backlash.

On December 03 2014 05:46 Nyxisto wrote:


But the differences are insane. Homosexual males make up about two percent of the population but are responsible for about 60-70% of new HIV infections. This coupled with the infection window make the group incredibly risky blood donors. Also if you'd try to seperate blood donors by ethnicity even if the risk statistics would warrant it from a medical standpoint you'd probably have insane political backlash.

On December 03 2014 05:04 QuanticHawk wrote:
I know that, but the same can happen to hetero people. While gays do have higher rates of infection than straight people, black people are also by far have the highest rates of infection among ethnicities. Depending where you read, something like 40%+ of all new cases in the states are from black people (who account for ~12% of the population) There's not any kind of limitation on people from at risk ethnicities donating.