Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:What is critical thinking? (Score 1) 397

by i kan reed (#48223403) Attached to: Employers Worried About Critical Thinking Skills

That's not a usage I've ever seen. It's certainly true people are quick to dismiss established ideas from powerful sources for various reasons that vary greatly in quality, but I don't think I've ever seen that notion attached to "critical thinking" as a definition.

Actual critical thinking is trickier to define. I like to think of it as always trying to come up with objective ways of comparing and judging ideas. And, critically, coming up with objective ways to compare and judge those "objective" measures.

Comment: Re:Remember when WSJ had a modicrum of decency? (Score 2) 606

I want to interject that none of us who agree with you just said believe that there is no level at which increasing worker wages starts to hurt an economy. Just that unreasonably low wages also hinder both human happiness and economic growth. Finding the ideal is both tricky and not without risk. There's a difference between wishful thinking (getting paid more is always better for everyone) and the argument we're actually trying articulate.

Comment: Re:Remember when WSJ had a modicrum of decency? (Score 2) 606

Any company not looking at automating away any level of skilled jobs at any point in history is just silly.

Employees cost money over time. Automation upfronts cost and then allows you to undercut competitors.

It's been that way since even before the steam engine.

Comment: Re:Remember when WSJ had a modicrum of decency? (Score 3, Insightful) 606

Except the minimum wage hasn't actually increased anywhere but Seattle, Washington(and even there it's still being phased in), and more-over, one of the big principles that undercuts this argument is: "once you can automate away a job, is there any wage at which you wouldn't?"

Comment: Re:Remember when WSJ had a modicrum of decency? (Score 5, Informative) 606

Point of fact: McDonalds as a corporation doesn't sign those peoples' paychecks, at least if their business model hasn't changed since 2000ish. They do franchising, and make money on the fact that franchises have to purchase supplies from the company. This allows them to dodge risk on opening in poor locations, or personnel expenses.

Now, I'm not so thick-headed as to imagine that they wouldn't come up with something like this to help franchises with wage costs, but I'm also aware that this tech is coming to all sorts of places other than Seattle where the minimum wage actually went up.

Comment: Remember when WSJ had a modicrum of decency? (Score 5, Interesting) 606

I mean, maybe I'm just harking back to a past that exists only in my mind, but I seem to recall a time when the journal actually covered business in its pages, rather than regurgitating neoclassical economics talking points all-day every day, attempting to construe every single negative thing as a result of failing to religiously adhere to its principles.

Am I misremembering, and imagining the shift from kinda disagreeably right-leaning to fanatical?

In any formula, constants (especially those obtained from handbooks) are to be treated as variables.