Member
Screenname:
C.R.
First Name:
See
Member Since:
2007-07-31 15:28:47 (960 Days)
Last Login:
2010-03-15 23:56:37 (2 Days)
City:
Draper
State:
UT
Gender:
male
Comments
Posted:
1799
Reported Others Abuse:
5
Removed As Abuse:
5
Votes
Voted By Others:
agree:
560
40.9%
funny:
75
5.5%
insightful:
83
6.1%
persuasive:
43
3.1%
disagree:
328
24%
generalization:
13
1%
redundant:
12
0.9%
unsubstantiated:
22
1.6%
inappropriate:
95
6.9%
offtopic:
61
4.5%
uncivil:
76
5.6%
Total:
1368
Votes Cast:
agree:
165
19.5%
funny:
79
9.3%
insightful:
53
6.3%
persuasive:
12
1.4%
disagree:
126
14.9%
generalization:
33
3.9%
redundant:
37
4.4%
unsubstantiated:
73
8.6%
inappropriate:
103
12.2%
offtopic:
64
7.6%
uncivil:
100
11.8%
Total:
845
Ignored
Ignoring other users:
1
Ignoring this user:
13
Recent Comments
The point of the book Freakonomics is that most people have no sense or awareness for what is actually going on around them. The KSL forum is a great place to demonstrate that point.
They are sent forth to teach, not to be taught.
Talking to people is not the same as learning from people.
A closed minded person could talk to a million people and learn less than an open minded person can learn from one.
It is extraordinary how little some people can learn in a situation that should be rich in opportunities to learn.
They are sent forth to teach, not to be taught.
Talking to people is not the same as learning from people.
A closed minded person could talk to a million people and learn less than an open minded person can learn from one.
It is extraordinary how little some people can learn in a situation that should be rich in opportunities to learn.
I have yet to meet someone who idealizes John Galt who is the least bit like the fictional character.
They are almost always economic failures working for the man.
They are one step removed from a living-in-their-mother's-basement Star Wars fan.
Why won't you read the book?
You can't really address the issue if you don't understand the issue.
BTW, even the author of the book has updated his statistical analysis.
You obviously have not read the book The author of Freakonomics was making an argument based on statistics and your point is irrelevant to the book. There is no reason to assume that the author of the book would argue one way or another on the points you brought up.