Education as a field is mostly a philosophy-based practice and is only now starting to dabble in evidence-based decision making.
We don't have time for rational solutions! Why won't you think of the children?
Procurement in many organizations is supposed to verify that management understands what they are buying.
They're supposed to verify that the order placed is what the manager wants rather than just what they asked for, but that's not the same thing as ensuring they understand the purchase, not at all. Management is in charge of strategy, they get the credit and the blame.
Forget about the class warfare, OK? Even Bruce Springsteen would agree that as long as everyone is winning, it shouldn't matter if someone is winning more.
Everyone except the most radical parts of the left would likely agree with that, the problem is when everyone stops winning it becomes a lot less palatable. In the US, that occurred in the mid-1970s so even the slowest among us have figured out that something is wrong by now.
Is it still sexism if it's correcting an existing sexist imbalance?
It's the difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcomes.
If there was an apocalypse, I assume there would be fewer people alive than there are now.
There is plenty of places to grow things if we all live like homesteaders on 2 or 3 acres of land.
You're going to need a lot more than 2 or 3 acres if you want to have any chance of actually making it. Traditionally the bare minimum was considered 40 acres and a mule. Sure, we can squeeze that down quite a bit with modern techniques but much of what makes high density agriculture work wouldn't be available in a post-collapse scenario.
Nice in theory, but do you really think this government is going make things better?
Well the Republicans aren't offering a free market alternative they're just suggesting we do away with regulating the incumbents.
I think there's a world market for about five computers. -- attr. Thomas J. Watson (Chairman of the Board, IBM), 1943