Lemming

I like the Socratic rejection theory myself.

Yes, makes about as much sense as an ethics commissioner who is appointed by the PM and reports only to the PM. The appointments are great. Allows the government to make vague, ill-conceived laws, and let the lap dog supreme court do the dirty work. No blame, no fuss, no muss. Of course no democracy but hey, that's too much work. Just like the senate. Another useless institution (in its current form) that serves the ruling party, not the people. Don't worry, be happy.

It is hard for me to believe that graduating marketing students, who can't relate a basic marketing concept, are instead consciously making the decision not to answer based on the need to reject the Socratic method. Can we simply not agree that they're ignorant or didn't even bother to read the chapter that was assigned to them? Why then expect a class of mechanics to know what the mundane, unimportant lesson of what an engine is? Then why should medical students bother parroting lessons on biology, anatomy and life sciences? And how can one engage in lateral thought, or innovation when one doesn't even know the basics? You're right, silly me, I've been hoodwinked by the evil Socratic method. If these individuals can't commit a simple concept to memory - one that is fundamentally important to their trade- then they shouldn't be calling themselves marketers. I guess I'm to take your opinion over current, expert academic thought backed by study after study. Perhaps Disney would agree with you, while they loose billions in Europe as a result of the same ignorance and arrogance. I've tried hard to accept your notion that students of a particular subject shouldn't be responsible for knowing the most basic information on that subject, but it remains difficult. Exploration is not a "modern" concept, even the prehistoric hominids walked around looking for stuff. Yes, I question the utilitarian value of space exploration. I'm still waiting for the incredible, life enriching contribution all the money and effort that was spent going to the moon brought to society. Well I guessed I missed the lesson that said marketing is just about selling cars. While I enjoy engaging in rational debate I loose interest when the name-calling starts. Reminds me of kids in the playground, not adults who are trying to engage in a meaningful exchange of ideas.

Actually, to say kids are better educated today is only partially correct. I remember during my undergrad studies there was a prof who claimed that most of the class didn't have basic spelling skills - these are kids in the 17 - 20 year-old range. Of course everyone in the class confidently chuckled. To prove his point he handed out a spelling test. Wow, what a change in the class's behavior. Anyway, more than 50% of the class failed, in spite of many of the words being quite simple and common. In other words, more than half of university students couldn't spell! Most kids don't read anymore and their analytical skills are reserved to googling a topic and repeating some boiled down, sound bite version of an answer. It requires no thought and gives the impression of being informed. And one last, quick story. I am just completing an MBA, and in one of my marketing classes the prof's first question to the students was, "What is the marketing concept?". In spite of most of the class having already taken three plus years of marketing, I was the only one able to answer the question. And this is the new generation of business leaders? I actually had a fellow student tell me he was tired of learning new things! Good thing his company was paying the bills, otherwise I would have thought he was wasting his money. A hundred years ago people where individualistic, they broke the land with muscle and determination. Perhaps they didn't know how to send a probe to Titan - who cares anyway - but they had a lot to be proud of. Today kids are too busy gaming on line, and we have become a society of shoppers, whose biggest worry is what colour of car to buy this year. Spelling, who cares, Spell Check will do it for us.

Well I suppose after 10 years of doing nothing the Liberals have some catching up to do, and that includes spending as much of Canadians' hard-earned money as possible. The key word throughout this process is that they have "promised" to do this and that. Well, Liberal promises aren't worth the paper they're printed on so my sensibilities take another bashing. While most Canadians just don't care anymore, the few that do seem to forget what a surplus means - more taxes than spending. Any fool can tax like no tomorrow, and refuse to spend. Yet despite all the waste and mismanagement, they've still managed to accumulate vast surpluses- gives a sense of how out of control taxes are. Taking the poor off the tax rolls? This is a brilliant idea? Are we so starved of sound government policy that we hold this concept up as something revolutionary and visionary? I should think that the only reason all these promises have been made had something to do with a minority government that is subject to defeat based on a non-confidence vote in the House. Of course, being a good Liberal means do whatever it takes to save your political ass, and to hell with the country. The child care program is another great Liberal idea. A wonderful way to employ a whole mess of political buddies, and insure the political industry remains alive and well. Hell, why would Canadians want discretion over their earnings when you can trust the government to take care of everything? It's getting to the point where we won't even have to care for our kids anymore. Go figure, lower taxes so both parents don't have to work six days a week just to pay bills. OMG, no need for a child care program!!!! But my God, asking Canadians to do something for themselves, blasphemy. The budget is great fiction, and one can always rely on the BS to come on hard and heavy this time of year. And God said unto them, give them programs and they shall be appeased.