Excellent point about CC’s. The downside is that instructor quality varies considerable both within and between CCs, and many students drop out or are not provided with adequate guidance in terms of GE requirements and transferability.
In terms of costs of UC other than Berkeley, (Davis, Cal Poly, UCLA, etc…) 16k in current times is a great bargain especially given the pipeline to grad school which is great even at non-Berkeley UCs.
I'm pretty sure that's the case at UC too. I don't know UC, but at my 4 year engineering school it felt like 25% attrition every year; if you only do a year and drop out, better to not be paying enormous student loans for probably the rest of your life for that.
If you do two or three years and drop out, better to have a degree, even if it's just an Associates.
If you know you'll make it all the way to a Bachelors, yeah, maybe it'd be better to go direct. But even then, you might get smaller class sizes (and better experiences) at a CC because of the relative levels of the student bodies. Lots of people taking calculus based physics of mechanics at a UC and not so many at a CC, so the UC might do lectures in a hall but the CC might have it in a classroom.
Community College has no real acceptance criteria.
.I think you might need to take a placement test, but even if you place low you can still enroll in most classes.
For me I literally didn't have much else going on, so why not.
Very VERY easy way to date girls from all over the world. Nothing like studying with a Japanese girl on your 20th birthday.
The thing with life is you can never *know* about tomorrow. You can do well in college, parents don't have a spare 15k for next year and have to drop out.
A lot of kids in CC are also working full time. If you have to drop out, it's fine, can always go back.
By the time I finished at a Cal State I was working a full time software engineering job.
I have issues with the current system in general. You should have to work at less one job for a few months before taking out any type of loan. You need to understand how difficult money is to earn.
I can only speak for my own experiences, but I found my instructors at community college to be absolutely fantastic and even better than the ones I had when I eventually transferred to a UC. I had transferred to a UC first, ran out of money and then I wrapped up at a cheaper CSU years later.
At a UC you're probably going to be interacting with teaching assistants anyway.
I have to completely disagree with your last paragraph. No one should be thinking grad school right after a B.A. Go and see the world for a little bit. Excluding maybe law and medicine.
Even then, I've seen this horribly backfire in families. The kid is expected to do really well in college and then become a doctor, the pressure is too much and they just spaz out.
Next thing you know your a college dropout couchsurfing because your parents are threatening to send you back to the old country for an arranged marriage.
Consider how that will restrain the diplomatic and geopolitical options available to future US presidents, particularly those of the other party and it starts to seem quite strategic if not a major win for isolationism and Trump’s Monroe 2.0 agenda.
I hesitate to ask but what is your gender? I think there may be very gender specific effects in this comparison. I would also be very curious the type and intensity of exercise and whether you had comorbidities that impact ability to train (obesity, low testosterone, etc).
Thanks for the response and the useful (to me at least) data point. Glad the AD helped and sorry to hear you didn’t find all that exertion useful. Goes to show how individual we all are in terms of mental health.
Therapy carries a huge risk, so maybe if you compare average outcomes exercise is only nearly as effective, but if you consider the 2 overall exercise comes out way, way ahead imho.
If so, that is a risk that is very dependent on local laws. I would be much more cautious about seeking mental health care in Florida, where the Baker Act makes it very easy, than in Connecticut [0]. The risk of being involuntarily committed also, of course, has to be balanced against the risk of forgoing mental health care when you need it and then injuring or killing yourself.
That seems like a minor concern. Therapeutic malpractice is a thing, misdiagnosis, iatrogenic treatments and so forth; not uncommon. Was a time when gay was in the dsm, the pendulum has swung back and forth on transgender children.
The big issue I have with this is no kale or oatmeal in the pyramid image. And rice seems to get a bad rank too. How many fat Asians do you see? People diss oatmeal (lames, tbh) cause of “leaky gut” but is that even a real thing? There’s also glyphosates but quaker is nongmo according to the label. Anyway, I see “leaky gut” and I think quack. The pyramid should have more kale, truly.
This was after the alleged attempted ICE ramming in Oakland last year where shots were fired but thankfully nobody died. I think there was a similar incident in LA. It would be great if there were technology to solve this problem. People perceive cars as deadly weapons and open fire and whether it’s good or not people who think they’re going to get smooshed and have a firearm will tend to use it. I didn’t see the one today but there have been enough of these cases that it really begs for a technological solution, like some sort of kill switch (no pun) that halts a vehicle if a person is in front of it. They’d have to make a law to retrofit older vehicles but it seems like something we could engineer fairly cheaply, and it would prevent at least some of these events. Even cases where the person in front of the car aren’t cops, like the guy who drove through the Christmas parade and killed the little kids, or the nazi kid in Charlottesville. Car rammings are becoming a horrible sort of meme. It’s contagious.
> like some sort of kill switch (no pun) that halts a vehicle if a person is in front of it.
That is a horrible and dangerous reaction that does not solve the problem whatsoever. You are typing this comment with your heart, not with your brain.
We have mandatory seat belts and air bags. A sensor on the hood to insure a car is not being used as a murder weapon seems minimal in comparison. Such a sensor would save many lives including the young lady involved in the incident today. We have strict gun laws, why does it make sense to let any psycho buy a cheap used car and go kill people with it? It’s a glaring inconsistency.
Outside of the pragmatic argument of current-tech limitations for such an implementation, cars should sometimes be a weapon.
If all cars were mandated by law to not accelerate when a person is in front of them, doesn't that give carjackers pretty much guaranteed success to confront and forcibly stop their victim before stealing their car, their belongings, or taking their life?
Why would I even bother buying a nice car if I know someone can just walk up in front of its front grill and hold me at gunpoint, and my car can't help but force me to stay there?
So we should have shootings like the one yesterday just because you want to drive a Lamborghini and murder carjackers? Current tech is totally sufficient to implement this. It’s already found in Waymo taxis based on news reports I’ve seen. It probably exists in teslas too, give or take software updates. It seems almost trivial: if someone is a foot in front of the car, disconnect the accelerator or drop to neutral on high acceleration. If cars can run people over from a dead stop, and if this is a common issue in law enforcement where people try to run over cops, and it clearly is, then we will have many more shootings like yesterday’s. That’s a world you want to live in? She wrote poetry.
I just watched a video where, at night in an isolated road flanked by woods, a man stops his truck in front of a woman in her car alone. He then sprints from his car toward her driver side door.
That woman would be raped and murdered in the middle of nowhere if her car disallowed her from making an executive decision for her safety.
Your reasoning is flawed. The man could have parked his truck in front of her car and her ability to ram it wouldn’t make a difference. Most car jackers and would be rapists do not approach their victim on foot at a 0 degree approach angle, from the front, they come from 270 degrees (the driver side), where the door they will open is located. They cannot jack the car or rape without that side approach.
We're done here. If you're only going to make emotional appeals and ignore every authoritative and logical argument presented to you, there's nothing else to discuss. You're arguing in bad faith and certainly know you're wrong.
Remote start/stop of motor vehicles is dangerous. You should not be wondering at any point in your life why automotive manufacturers are ignoring your armchair design specifications.
I'm sorry, does the gated community even let you out? Or women in? It's painfully obvious you've never in your life had to be concerned about your safety in any meaningful way.
> Criminals would never get in front of a car. Especially after you legally mandate that by doing it their victim cannot escape by any means anymore.
What is the value of being in front of a car? The value is in opening the door, which is on the side. Sure you could have two jackers, one in front and another on the side but then running over 1 of the 2 (or more) again becomes useless as the side jacker would shoot you.
> Or women in?
You must be rolling in women. Lucky them. Maybe you can take them out to dinner and run over some car jackers on the way home.
Well yes, the US could certainly easily kidnap leaders of friendly countries. It'd also presumably be very unlikely to result in a nuclear response from either.
In terms of costs of UC other than Berkeley, (Davis, Cal Poly, UCLA, etc…) 16k in current times is a great bargain especially given the pipeline to grad school which is great even at non-Berkeley UCs.
reply