|
|
|
|
Northern Ireland22206 Posts
On September 16 2014 13:58 tehh4ck3r wrote:
Guys only 3 more pages until we get a CM tip
(riiight?)
It's every 1000 pages
|
On September 16 2014 16:58 Gosi wrote:
dango dango
Clannad...
dango dango dango
daikazoku
|
That Rosh change makes it look like the pits from superiormoba.
|
Bosnia-Herzegovina983 Posts
On September 16 2014 18:47 -Celestial- wrote:
That Rosh change makes it look like the pits from superiormoba.
I thought it was inferiormoba?
|
Northern Ireland22206 Posts
|
|
|
One question is where Smite and HoN come into all of this.
|
HoN: confused moba. Strife: Moba?
|
LC with arcana playing on bulldog's stream, 50 victories short of 5k duel wins. jesssssuuuussssss
|
which one is daedgame moba? sc2 or HoN?
|
On September 16 2014 07:56 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2014 07:40 govie wrote:On September 16 2014 06:28 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 16 2014 06:20 LuckoftheIrish wrote:On September 16 2014 06:16 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 16 2014 06:01 LuckoftheIrish wrote:
Amusingly, I triple-majored in history, classics and Asian Studies. None of those things are even remotely worthwhile.
On the other hand, a buddy of mine in high school got his Master Electrician's license and is making $150,000 a year.
It just takes a certain amount of foresight and the willingness to look at things rationally and without romance. No matter how many professors tell you otherwise, or how stupid it sounds, a degree in Gender Studies or Creative Writing qualifies you to work as a barista, while a certification in pipefitting guarantees that you'll make enough money to do whatever you want to do for fun. It's practical to go and study fields that are in high-demand, it's just not the basis of university at all. It's even dumber to reject someone's perspective on university and debt by saying: "all you have to do to avoid paying debt for decades is to study something that pays well" If people knowingly make shitty decisions, they shouldn't be surprised when those decisions have consequences. If you take out loans to pay for an expensive liberal arts college, and you get a degree that doesn't have career potential, it is no one's fault but your own that you're stuck in debt. It's no different to buying anything else you can't afford. I think people go into university for different reasons than for career interest. That's on top of the fact that they are only eligible for certain degrees or programs if they have right grades or curriculum in school (so someone who didn't achieve very well in Mathematics, is very unlikely to get those strong career-driven fields). Are we to blame, as a society, high-schoolers for failing to achieve certain areas of their semesters or those without the aptitude to achieve in Math, Science, Physics, Biology? Or is it fair of you to dismiss everyone because they didn't all choose the same fields that pay so very well? Let's not forget that if everyone chose those fields, demand would be lower, salaries would drop and they wouldn't be as "rational" of a choice as they once were. Not to mention that the other curriculums would also lose a lot of employment and, ultimately, hurt the society's economy. I think, in short, you narrowly defined the point of university to a purely practical purpose while also failing to see how your dismissive viewpoint not only hurts your own argument hypothetically, but also from a "rational" perspective as a society. No he's right about the choice in education i think. You know prehand that liberal arts isnt such a high garantee for a job like other educations are, thats how it works. Its fine you choose an education that seems fun with less jobperspective then a normal education, but then it isnt school anymore but more daycare-like. Now de question for the young artist should be, is the education worth the debt or not? Are there other ways to reach the same goal? Arts & education are important ofcourse but op does have a valid point. Let's remove Liberal Arts from the equation. Even Social Sciences simply do not pay as marginally well as other degrees: but they're quintessential for people to take. Philosophically, university should be a place to seek further knowledge on affairs that pertain to both your interest and values, intellect and perspective on the world. but even if we remove that ideology, going to university purely for a job that removes all previous debts and/or financial obligations of both itself (university debt) as well as potential of financial stability (if we are to assume that the job market of demand for newly-graduates is stable and high) ruins the point of choice within university or seeking a higher degree. I agree with OP on the suggestion that debts and cost of degrees should be proportionate to what the degree can offer you in terms of salary and career. That said, many social science degrees require a higher education (graduate school) to be fulfilling in terms of salary to be able to pay any of it. Saying you should enroll in degrees that pay well to pay back going into university in the first place feels very backwards. That's on top of blaming that person for not narrowing their life's choices to a career they may not even be interested in or remote to their actual capabilities. Minimizing other specialties as "daycare" is just circlejerking.
I dont agree that one of the universities primary tasks is too help youngsters develop there views and personality, thats were we differ i guess. The skills, views & personality you gained from your education are useless if there is no demand for these during your lifetime. If you allready know this fact before you choose, it would seem foolish to follow a course which creates a large debt for you without any garantee of a return of investment. Eventually its just a job, nothing more.
Big corporations used to have inhouse education, i still think it is a shame those are mostly gone. Alot of people and companies benefitted from those institutions within a big company. It was a great way to learn skills without any debt and you learned alot more indepth then in a typical school/uni. Nowadays you have to have a degree before you can enrole in internships i think thats a shame.
|
That's a bannable necro, imo.
Srsly y.
|
Hon : Daedgame Moba
Smite : It's a moba ?
|
Pudge Wars is the Ur-Moba.
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On September 16 2014 21:29 govie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2014 07:56 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 16 2014 07:40 govie wrote:On September 16 2014 06:28 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 16 2014 06:20 LuckoftheIrish wrote:On September 16 2014 06:16 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 16 2014 06:01 LuckoftheIrish wrote:
Amusingly, I triple-majored in history, classics and Asian Studies. None of those things are even remotely worthwhile.
On the other hand, a buddy of mine in high school got his Master Electrician's license and is making $150,000 a year.
It just takes a certain amount of foresight and the willingness to look at things rationally and without romance. No matter how many professors tell you otherwise, or how stupid it sounds, a degree in Gender Studies or Creative Writing qualifies you to work as a barista, while a certification in pipefitting guarantees that you'll make enough money to do whatever you want to do for fun. It's practical to go and study fields that are in high-demand, it's just not the basis of university at all. It's even dumber to reject someone's perspective on university and debt by saying: "all you have to do to avoid paying debt for decades is to study something that pays well" If people knowingly make shitty decisions, they shouldn't be surprised when those decisions have consequences. If you take out loans to pay for an expensive liberal arts college, and you get a degree that doesn't have career potential, it is no one's fault but your own that you're stuck in debt. It's no different to buying anything else you can't afford. I think people go into university for different reasons than for career interest. That's on top of the fact that they are only eligible for certain degrees or programs if they have right grades or curriculum in school (so someone who didn't achieve very well in Mathematics, is very unlikely to get those strong career-driven fields). Are we to blame, as a society, high-schoolers for failing to achieve certain areas of their semesters or those without the aptitude to achieve in Math, Science, Physics, Biology? Or is it fair of you to dismiss everyone because they didn't all choose the same fields that pay so very well? Let's not forget that if everyone chose those fields, demand would be lower, salaries would drop and they wouldn't be as "rational" of a choice as they once were. Not to mention that the other curriculums would also lose a lot of employment and, ultimately, hurt the society's economy. I think, in short, you narrowly defined the point of university to a purely practical purpose while also failing to see how your dismissive viewpoint not only hurts your own argument hypothetically, but also from a "rational" perspective as a society. No he's right about the choice in education i think. You know prehand that liberal arts isnt such a high garantee for a job like other educations are, thats how it works. Its fine you choose an education that seems fun with less jobperspective then a normal education, but then it isnt school anymore but more daycare-like. Now de question for the young artist should be, is the education worth the debt or not? Are there other ways to reach the same goal? Arts & education are important ofcourse but op does have a valid point. Let's remove Liberal Arts from the equation. Even Social Sciences simply do not pay as marginally well as other degrees: but they're quintessential for people to take. Philosophically, university should be a place to seek further knowledge on affairs that pertain to both your interest and values, intellect and perspective on the world. but even if we remove that ideology, going to university purely for a job that removes all previous debts and/or financial obligations of both itself (university debt) as well as potential of financial stability (if we are to assume that the job market of demand for newly-graduates is stable and high) ruins the point of choice within university or seeking a higher degree. I agree with OP on the suggestion that debts and cost of degrees should be proportionate to what the degree can offer you in terms of salary and career. That said, many social science degrees require a higher education (graduate school) to be fulfilling in terms of salary to be able to pay any of it. Saying you should enroll in degrees that pay well to pay back going into university in the first place feels very backwards. That's on top of blaming that person for not narrowing their life's choices to a career they may not even be interested in or remote to their actual capabilities. Minimizing other specialties as "daycare" is just circlejerking. I dont agree that one of the universities primary tasks is too help youngsters develop there views and personality, thats were we differ i guess. The skills, views & personality you gained from your education are useless if there is no demand for these during your lifetime. If you allready know this fact before you choose, it would seem foolish to follow a course which creates a large debt for you without any garantee of a return of investment. Eventually its just a job, nothing more. Big corporations used to have inhouse education, i still think it is a shame those are mostly gone. Alot of people and companies benefitted from those institutions within a big company. It was a great way to learn skills without any debt and you learned alot more indepth then in a typical school/uni. Nowadays you have to have a degree before you can enrole in internships i think thats a shame.
y r u doin this
we work so hard to bury
|
NECRO'D THROUGH THE HEART, AND YOU'RE TO BLAME
YOU GIVE GD A BAD NAME
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
i didnt know u were a bon jovi fan
|
What's bon jovi? Is that like bonbons?
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
