Arkan wrote:If degrees are meaningless, then don't go to a doctor.
I never said degrees are meaningless. I would think that someone as 'highly educated' with a degree as yourself would be able to understand that I meant they were not the only proof of an education or the end game defining you as "highly educated".
Arkan wrote: You argue that a doctor has no more intelligence than anyone else unless he/she is employed as a doctor.
I never argued that a doctor had no more intelligence than anyone else. I argued that you would be educated in your field of study and that you would need to be able to perform your field of study successfully. I was speaking in more general terms. However, if you want to choose a doctor as an example I would not say a doctor is highly educated with his degree as a doctor if he performs his duties and misdiagnoses everyone.
Arkan wrote: There are a lot of kinds of idiots out there, including some doctors, but if you're pretending that you're smarter than them just because you're hypothetically an auto mechanic, then you're about as stupid as people come. FYI, being an auto mechanic is pretty easy.
I believe this is the major reading fail yet again. You are trying to define a hierarchy of what is "highly educated". I never once said that an auto mechanic is smarter than a doctor. I never quite ranked professions. In regards to a field of study, different people would be deemed educated, highly educated, and a genius. To deny acknowledging someone else being highly educated in other fields without a piece of paper is ignorant. And as easy as you think being an auto mechanic is, there is a tremendous amount of successful auto mechanics lacking in the country. Just "being" something is easy for however short or long it may last. That can go for any career.
Arkan wrote: No a piece of paper doesn't make you smarter, but the effort to get it actually does. You can be smart without that piece of paper, but you would also be smarter if you also get that piece of paper.
You really think so? I would rephrase that to at least discretionary effort. Paying to achieve a piece of paper does not also make you smarter. The information you learn in school can be acquired outside of it and studied and perfected without stepping foot on a campus. However, there are some fields where you may need to get onto a campus to put the learnings into practice or utilize equipment to demonstrate the knowledge(So a college might be necessary). Some fields may seriously require you have the piece of paper, while others just state they do. Using myself as an example: My experience in the field of Restaurant Hospitality Management without a paper will trump an individual with a piece of paper from the best school. Proven success, experience, and execution is more tangible evidence to an employer than the degree saying you learned how to do it. This goes for many fields. It is very sad seeing those with degrees struggle trying to find a job. It was disheartening watching my brother interview and turn down entry level positions to get your foot in the door and prove what you learned because he was told and believed he should get a high ranking, highly paid position from the start.
I think both statements have to do with your literal comprehension. I was not at all serious in the comment about trump curing cancer. It was a metophor for how the left and right will always argue the opposite. As for the MS13 comment, the reporter lastly questioned him in regards to MS13 and he responded using the term animals in his repsonse. There is no way to know his motive other than your opinion of it. So when he "damage controled", he in reality just reinforced what he stated the first time in non negiotable layman's terms.Arkan wrote:Trump actually keeps trying to cut cancer funding, so stop trying that stupid argument that he might cure cancer and we'd hate him. We hate him because WE are trying to cure cancer and he is trying to stop us. Trump didn't call MS13 animals until he decided to do damage control later after his rant.