@Cocopops

he entire human race should be sterilized thus ridding the earth of it's most destructive species.

This would pave the way for the acceleration of the mental development of other intelligent life forms such as ants,dolphins etc., to develop their abilities and perhaps reverse the unforgivable decimation we have inflicted, and continue to inflict, upon mother Earth.

You are describing Misanthropic Nihlism--a very dangerous, pernicious philosophy that is being pushed as of the last couple decades.

I. Apply to Community College

-Apply to your local community college

-Figure out full-time semester tuition & fees rates as well as per credit hour

--Example: My local community college is $1600 flat tuition rate per semester for full-time students (i.e. 12-18 credits), or $3200 per year

--Note, full-time status is not required for the Pell Grant, only half-time, in which case yearly costs would be $1600

--Pell Grant goes toward tuition first, and then the rest is reimbursed to you by check in mail or direct deposit to bank account. So, the less money spent on tuition, the more in your pocket.

-See what programs are offered

--Example Associate Degree programs with salaries in the $40,000-$75,000 range:

a. Engineering

b. Computer Science

c. Nursing

d. Dental Hygienist

e. Chemistry

f. Radiology

g. Electrician

h. Plumbing

i. CAD

j. PTA (Physical Therapy Assistant)

k. Software Development

l. HVAC

m. Multimedia, Web Development, and Gaming

n. Architecture and Drafting

o. Aviation and Flight Training

p. Accounting

.

.

.

etc. etc.

II. File for FASFA

-Each year, you must file for Financial Aid with the Federal Government for school. This is very easy, takes maybe 30 minutes. Website here: https://fafsa.ed.gov/

-After file for federal aid, file for State level aid (the link for your state should be emailed to you after completing your federal fasfa)

-This information will be provided to the school(s) you send it to, who will offer you a Financial Aid package.

-Federal Pell Grant is nearly $6000 per year, and State is typically $1000-2000. Students qualify for 6 years.

-Then, if used properly, no-strings-attached College money offered to students by the State over the 6 year period is between $36,000 to $48,000. If you attend low cost tuition schools, then you can 'pocket' a sizeable chunk of that money--the rest will automatically go toward your tuition and fees.

III. Build your Credit

-Young people with no prior credit history have neither good nor bad credit--just 'no real credit'. Then, there is typically a bit of a 'chicken and the egg' problem with how to build credit as it (often) requires credit in order to apply for cards

-However, attending College (including Community College) helps bypass this issue. Start with 1 or 2 basic Secured cards where you put a small security deposit down (which the Pell Grant cover), form very minor credit history (only a few months required). Then, a number of credit companies offer student cards, as College kids are viewed as a more promising return then average. These are typically unsecured cards (i.e. no money down required), with higher credit limits. College students can potentially (easily) get 5 or so such cards, opening up various lines of credit with different institutions, and raising their credit limit. This combined with low utilization rate and on time payments could easily get a young persons credit score over the 700+ mark by the time they graduate. Another way the Pell Grant helps build up credit in this way is through opening various banking accounts with the money directly deposited in from the Grant. (A) It is much easier to get a credit card through a bank that you do business with (B ) Banks almost always have opening promotions somewhere between $100-350. Additionally, credit cards will often have similar promotions. Then, if you shift the money around wisely, you can make extra thousand to few thousands simply for shifting money around in a strategic manner. This process can be repeated in a years time, by which time the banks will want you to come back and re-offer such promotions.

-With this new credit score and extra money, one could easily put a down-payment on a condominium and qualify for good mortgage rates, which is another safe investment rather than renting for years--which is just lost money.

Note:

If you just want the money, you can enroll in as little as a few/several online 'fluff' courses at your local community college and still get the full Pell Grant for 6 years.

Should Community College be Free?

Community College already is free (if you're wise). Students qualify for Pell Grants up to $6000 per year from the federal government, and possibly a single or couple thousand dollar worth of grants from their state, if applied. Then, as long as a student is enrolled at least half-time in school, they are eligible to receive about $6000-$8000 per year--no strings attached. My local Community College is $1500 per semester for full-time students, or $3000 per year.

Then, a student could go to Community College for 3 years, earn multiple associates degrees in disciplines that credential them for post-graduation jobs in the $40,000-$75,000 range; all free of charge, plus the government pays you $12,000 which you are able to invest in anyway you please--which, if you are savvy, is a strong basis for building more money, credit score, etc. etc.

The bigger question is; what is everyone complaining about? Why are they so unable to see the 'chess board' accurately and play a good game?

@marcusmoon

The way your generation views marriage and sex is nothing new.

At all.

That has been common since the early 1970s. The casual hookup is only a new way to say it. Lots of us planned never to get married, but that ultimately yields to unexpected pressures.

I understand and appreciate your perspective here--though I would push back that sites like Tinder and the massive wave of internet porn (and such) are certainly new; and are having significant effects of de-coupling sex from (serious) romantic partnerships.

There is another dangerous factor here that neo-feminist movement has introduced, where girls (overwhelmingly) voluntarily engage in the casual hook-up culture, though demand legal "protections" that are extremely dangerous and predatory toward men (who are left in a very vulnerable position, whether they are aware of it or not--if and until the law were to step in, they would find out very quickly). If you are interested in more on that, see my Thread "University Policy on Sexual Violence"--I outline my Universities official policies on the matter--and it is very disturbing.

@marcusmoon

Apparently you have never had to deal with family and girlfriend/boyfriend pressure to get married.

Correct. Things are definitely quite different now, also. That is, the norm is for people 'tying the knot' in their low to mid thirties--compared to my parents (gen X) who were married in their low twenties.

Also, as I mentioned in a previous post to Antrim, people in my generation view 'marriage' or even 'long-term monogamous relationships' very, very differently. It is becoming thought of as a bit more formalized more extended relationship, where (more likely than not), is not going to last indefinitely. Essentially, the idea is that 'true love' is a myth--and therefore high doses of sexual promiscuity is a wiser/superior life route. That is, the idea of 'marriage' is beginning to fail--big time. This has a lot to do with the increased rise of the 'casual hook-up, with (ostensibly) no consequences, culture'. Note, I do not view this as a good thing (at all), though, that is how things are now. It is quite sad, actually.

Most people are living without much of a thought toward long-term 'marriage'-type relationships--or even having kids someday. I am sure this will change for many when they start to hit an age where they really have to decide fast what they are going to do, though, of course, that is not the ideal set up for such a huge life decision.

@Antrim

Although I agree with this, it is precisely why women initiate 70% of divorces now--as it does not penalize them. In fact, they make out pretty well in the exchange. If all monetary penalty was removed, one should expect to see about a 50/50 split, just as found in non-marital break-ups

@marcusmoon

Homosexual couples still do not have to get married, though. Then, how did it tear down this advantage, you discussed?

@Antrim

Of course the level of success of this union is dependent upon the wedded couple not dishonoring their marriage vows and sticking to their guns by not taking the easy opinion of running like blue blazes away if and when the relationship hits a rough patch.

Unfortunately, I think 'running when the going gets tough' is the norm--particularly in the younger generations of which I am a part. It seems to be viewed as a somewhat more formalized, extended casual-type relationship of which many clearly have it in the back of their mind they can just 'break up' if things 'drift apart'--like any other relationship. However, as you pointed out in subsequent posts, this is intended to work out in the female's favor, and a lot of these naïve (young) men will (and do) get burnt by the process.

@NumberOne

MathFan, I appreciate...you

Thank you

he "accompanying problem" is that people (namely innocent children) keep getting shot by guns. The ROOT OF THAT ISSUE is the fact that you are arming the people who are doing it with guns.

The 'root(s) of the problem' are the factors leading people to lash out in hyper-violent manner. This tends to manifest by gun violence as it is the most convenient weapon. Now, even if America banned all guns, we would still be left with the 'core' of the problem unaddressed & a violent society in which people find other means to 'lash out'.

@NumberOne

Again, that still does not address the roots of the issue--simply one way that the accompanying problems manifest

@NumberOne

I did not even state my position on guns...you simply jumped to your own conclusions and ran with it..

What is the most logical progression of events if school shootings continue unabated

Logically, we should be addressing the roots of the issue--typically social exclusion, isolation, ostracization, bullying, failure of Community networking/support system (which is overwhelmingly non-existent), less avenues available for the target to address bullies, ect. ect. All of this builds an enormous amount of resentment, hatred, rage, powerlessness, mental instability, ect. which leads the person over the brink and expresses their pain in completely unacceptable ways.

@Antrim

You represent everything that is wrong with our society and you not only seem proud of your shocking character flaws but you boast about them.

In the way that Nom described is alcohol abuse, I couldn't agree with you more Antrim

For instance, all throughout High School and College, most/overwhelming majority of my peers seemed dead-set upon making a mockery of their own life and the species generally--they drown themselves in a sea of alcoholism (as well as sex addiction, drug abuse/addiction, ect.). Their goal appears to be to lower the bar of human intellect, responsibility, character, strength, productivity, ect. as much as possible.

Rather than attend to College to augment one's cognitive capacities, they seem intent upon utterly destroying them.

Now, I understand situations such as Robert Downey Jr. where extremely irresponsible parents more or less forced him to do "hard" drugs at a young age which de-railed his life (in many ways) and sympathize as such. Also, if a person such as Carl Sagan, Francis Crick, Sean Carroll, ect. ect. want to do a recreational drug in a responsible manner in which it only effects themselves--great, I believe that is their decision of which I have no issue with. However, the type of behavior Nomenclature is discussing here (stumbling & fumbling all over himself--of which he does indeed appear proud of) is truly repulsive and at zero-sum conflict with a robust society for which we should all aspire to live in.

@Nomenclature

Got hammered on Thunderbird (fortified wine) on my 16th birthday, and then got arrested in the afternoon for breach of the peace. Lol. I was shouting in the town centre and generally acting like an idiot. Fully deserved it.

That generally fits the picture. Thanks for framing it

@Nomenclature

Alcohol gives me a pretty intense high, but what goes up must come down, and that's the problem with the sauce. When the effects start to wear off I feel rotten. Not necessarily hangover rotten. It's usually more a feeling of depression.

Well, that certainly explains the anger issues & general lack of maturity

Btw, aren't you (nearly) 40?--Not 19? Actually, even 19 would be an excuse/cop-out

Yes she should , it’s a done deal if she decides to run unless Kim Kardashian’s decides to give it a go

Or "The Rock", of course

@Nomenclature

Exactly how does replying to someone else's thread constitute, "talking to yourself"? Are we in your black is white, up is down mirror universe again, bronto?

Although you are not Jolie, Brontoraptor's larger point is correct. You really need to back off from abusing the alt-account loop-hole to such a high extent.

One might could argue that sports builds self esteem, creates a sense of community, etc at the highschool and college level

I agree. In fact, I think the socialization factor found in sports is crucial to healthy development (within certain reasonable boundaries of play and competition). If you observe other mammals, "play fighting" is extremely important for proper individual and social development. Exhibit A: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vL8x7LcA-Y4

That still in no way gets you to the modern absurdity that I am taking issue with/arguing against.

@Nomenclature

Capitalism is the problem. Entertainment is the oxycontin. It doesn't cure you, but it does make the problem easier to deal with.

Are you suggesting that you are comfortable with a "Brave New World" scenario?

Edit: Furthermore, you are misunderstanding your own position. You have now stated:

A. You are an "Inverse Capitalist" (i.e. Social Democrat, like Bernie Sanders, Green Party, ect.--which you wrongly referred to as Democratic Socialism)

B. Against the Motion "Free Markets are Not Sensible" and went on to argue support for (what you perceived to be) a Free Market system

C. Capitalism is the problem, which is inherently a Market System (whether Constrained or Unfettered)

Which one is it? Based on reading your argument history, you fall in line with (A) and are confused about the terminology as well as applications in other areas (i.e. your knowledge of Economic systems is highly limited and causes you to make all sorts of errors that you are not consciously aware of)

@brontoraptor

It would be very, very subjective to say musicians, NFL players, NBA players, actors, etc are"physically destructive to the planet".

That is not what I am saying. The current Market system often does not take into account "externalities" that are not relevant to business expenses, although it may be disastrous for the ecosystem, ect. (the athletes, actors, ect. was a separate point)

My point about athletes, actors, ect. is that they are not what allows society to continue to function. In fact, they are taking advantage of the "toys" provided by the very few Scientists and Engineers, held together by the necessary labor intensive workers, and are simultaneously sh'tting on these people (even if they are not aware of it). Furthermore, it is really inverting the pyramid of who works harder and allows society to function. Construction workers are so much more important than Baseball players even though our current system would lead an outside observer to conclude the opposite (based on factors such as wealth, status, resources, living comfort, ect.)

@brontoraptor

Survival of the fittest?

Please explain what you mean by that in this context (before I answer, I want to make sure I am understanding you correctly)

So if one wants massive wealth, don't go into a "noble profession". Go into a profession that creates wealth.

Again, I'm not sure what you mean by this (what constitutes as a "noble profession"). Also, it depends what you mean by "creating wealth" because given the current system, destructive forces (intellectually, physically, for the planet, ect.) "create wealth" (i.e. monetary profits) but serve little to no useful purpose

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/ A FreeMarketSystemisNotSensible

@brontoraptor

Good. You should desire to slow down how fast they get to putting the bug in your brain to control you through electric shocks.

Jokes aside, the larger context of what you raised here is very valid and (importantly) will only be solved/reasoned through by an educated, informed public that has an understanding of the direction modern technology is headed (if it is not actively stopped). I think this is a very important societal issue you touched upon, and is further evidence why we need to promote a society that is incentivized to generally keep up with the knowledge base of modern Sci. and Tech. Otherwise, these crucially important decisions will be put in the hands of an extreme minority of people working in esoteric fields

@brontoraptor

We have a constrained market system. It's why we have monopoly laws.

I know, and there are many different possible varities of such a system. The one I am arguing for is not at all the typical one promoted by people such as Sanders, Social Democrats, ect. (although I did not come up with this general framework myself, I do make some of my own modifications/alterations--the one I promote that is). See this thread where I begin to discuss it further (although I am still in the process of explaining it):

www.createdebate.com/debate/show/AFreeMarketSystemisNotSensible