its like gender studies was designed specifically to be a wasteful gouvernment expenditure

@Grenade123 nobody supports that system, when people talk brackets they mean progressive tax bracket

My argument was about so called 'trickle down economics' or economics, as anyone else calls them

Tax brackets work like this. Say 5 10 15% fo simplicity

@Grenade123 income in that bracket gets taxed at that rate

It is Julz

Gender studies is a 0 job opportunity major,

Meaning those people will become poor/useless, and thus want extra benefits from the state (so another voter for welfare)

5% Up to 5000, 10% from 5000 to 10000 and the 15% on anything over 10000

Philosophy studies is a 0 job opportunity major,

Meaning those people will become poor/useless, and thus want extra benefits from the state (so another voter for welfare)

@RyeNorth I agree that supply side economics is important

This is a bad argument.

Philosophy shouldn't be a university degree either

@Dennafen true, speeches and books are lucrative now

not actual numbers just a conceptual simulation

...

Yes it should.

So should gender studies.

Pondering reality doesn't exactly have its uses that a free book on the internet can't provide

It shouldn't be a required class for a major maybe.

@ExceptionalFeather yes, thank you. except what happens when you get small raise that takes you just into the next bracket?

It should be allowed in school, but not be funded a penny

Who makes books though 🤔

That's an argument against school in general @Dr.Wol

You get taxed at the higher percetage for the amount you make IN the higher bracket

@Grenade123 then the portion of the raise that goes in the bracket gets taxed a little more

nah, school should be there to teach you the basics, and later on a trade of choice in something thats valuable to society

Gender studies isn't valuable to society

You don't suddenly get taxed the higher percetage on the full amount

@Grenade123 I think there should be discussion on where and how much the brackets are but I don't believe in getting rid of them

You don't need a school to teach you anything really, it's for free on the internet.

School are there to teach how to think, not what to think.

exactly, but since children make poor decisions, in order to prevent a generation of stupids (on paper, cuz people are stupid in general)
You force them the basics by mandatory schooling

The problem with gender studies, and other such classes is that they're indoctrinating people into an ideology not the thrust of the ideas.

@Grenade123 there is also the issue of using brackets in determining welfare, which could be looked at

theres nothing to learn in gender studies, all it is is propaganda

That's not true.

Theres no trade you learn

And pondering things from a different angle is just general Philosophy

theres nothing Gender Studies teaches you

thats specific to gender studies

Trades aren't the only useful knowledge you can have.

any knowledge outside a trade can be done outside school

school should be there to teach you a trade, so you can find specialised work

No.

does it take into account cost of living in the given area? because i feel like even the poor with working jobs in say California are rich if you just look at some of their salaries

You can read books by philosophers that doesn't make you a philosopher.

@Grenade123 That is usually handled more by city taxing, and wages

you can read books on how to philosophise

You can read books, and great authors, that doesn't make you a writer.

so then the feds shouldn't be taxing people, more taxing the states.

@Grenade123 Someone choosing to live in an expensive area are using their wealth to do so though as well so that should be factored in

i mean, if they are too far removed to really know the cost of living, why tax everyone when 70k could mean you are rich in like Louisiana and poor in cali.

No, philosophies is a cohortative line of education, it's part of you must challenge arguments, and have yours be challenged.

@Grenade123 For sure a lot of taxing and spending should be moved to the states

yes, and how do you need a full college class for that?

Argumentation isn't a skill that emerges naturally.

you can write a book "The fundamentals of Philosophy" and sell it for 30 bucks

Sure it is

i think all that power should be moved down. cut some the state stuff, give it to towns, replace it with power from the feds

give that to the states

Argumentation is a skill you learn by argumenting

Having debates

@Awrini Being contrary isn't the same thing as argumentation.

@Grenade123 The same job in Louisiana typically pays more in Cali, but they can still move if they like

Debates aren't argumentation.

A person who learns "The fine skill of arguing" will not suddenly become a great debater

Debates require argumentation

I'm not being contrary. True argumentation comes from gathering knowledge.

Arguing isn't argumentation.

you know what i mean

@Grenade123 The Fed imo mostly only should do international affairs, I don''t see much they should be responsible beyond that

don't strawman my poor use of my 2nd language

Yes, and it's not what I'm talking about.

agreed

I'm not.

You are, you know what i mean and deliberately put me in a bad light for using wrong words by pointing them out

When you are arguementative, yiu are also expected to be able to reinforce your arguements with facts.

No, I'm not. You are talking about taking separate position, and arguing over which is correct.

That is not argumentation.

That is an argument, or a debate.

Argumentation requires practice, just like any other skill

commieforina wants to be ultra socialist? fine.... don't use my fucking money from way the fuck over here to do it when i want to help this poor person right down the street from me.

Yes, but the skill you're promoting is not argumentation.

what is it then?

It's debate.

@Grenade123 exactly, then they can fail and be an example

debate requires argumentation

No it doesn't debate is not argumentation.

more over, then the rest of the states will be able to offer help

i said no such thing

rather than everyone drowning

i said it REQUIRES it

Not really.

You can't have a debate without argumentation

It requires an argument, not argumentation.

a debate without argumentation is the Leftist tactic of just shouting over another person

Dennafen

@Grenade123 And if you don't like your government, instead of having 0 real options because the EU and Canada are nuts, you can move states

exactly

although soon there will be no EU at this rate

so maybe there will be options again

@Grenade123 Course you have to be careful about too much polarization

Debates are adversarial by design, you don't care about the other persons points, your interlocutor is the enemy and the audience is the target.