[eavesdropper]

[quote=briansd1][quote=eavesdropper]
[quote=sdduuuude] And please, for god’s sake, make your little engineers take economics.[/quote]

You’re a god, sdduuuude!! I agree wholeheartedly! In fact, it should be a requirement of both engineering and science curricula, IMHO.[/quote]

That should start in middle school, IMO. There should be mandatory classes on consumer finance so kids understand the credit cards they get when they turn 18.[/quote]

Totally agree with you on your suggestion, Brian. As a parent, you’d have to make sure that the schools weren’t actually bringing in “volunteers” from the credit card companies to teach it, though.

I actually like the idea of assigning a year-long mandatory class in Personal Finance and Investing early in high school. I think if it was structured in the right way, it would be of enormous value to the students in planning out how to pay for college. It should be presented in a videogame format, in which each student is assigned an individual life scenario, with challenges around which they have to manage their finances (i.e., divorced 3 times with alimony payments and child support; catastrophic illness at age 34; a shop-and-hoard addiction; natural disaster scenario with no homeowners’ insurance).

It not only would result in students learning basic money management skills, but it would also contribute toward the development of much-needed critical thinking skills.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=briansd1][quote=eavesdropper]
[quote=sdduuuude] And please, for god’s sake, make your little engineers take economics.[/quote]

You’re a god, sdduuuude!! I agree wholeheartedly! In fact, it should be a requirement of both engineering and science curricula, IMHO.[/quote]

That should start in middle school, IMO. There should be mandatory classes on consumer finance so kids understand the credit cards they get when they turn 18.[/quote]

Totally agree with you on your suggestion, Brian. As a parent, you’d have to make sure that the schools weren’t actually bringing in “volunteers” from the credit card companies to teach it, though.

I actually like the idea of assigning a year-long mandatory class in Personal Finance and Investing early in high school. I think if it was structured in the right way, it would be of enormous value to the students in planning out how to pay for college. It should be presented in a videogame format, in which each student is assigned an individual life scenario, with challenges around which they have to manage their finances (i.e., divorced 3 times with alimony payments and child support; catastrophic illness at age 34; a shop-and-hoard addiction; natural disaster scenario with no homeowners’ insurance).

It not only would result in students learning basic money management skills, but it would also contribute toward the development of much-needed critical thinking skills.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=jstoesz]Engineers can easily go into business and sales (assuming they have the personality for it)…business majors can not go into engineering. Enough said. [/quote]

Are you serious?? Perhaps you should explain precisely what you are referring to when you say “go into business”.

What, exactly, makes up the course of study for “going into business”? And are you saying that business majors are not capable of handling the level of academic studies assigned to engineering students?

Do you also believe that business majors cannot manage the academic demands of science majors?

While it is true (as I mentioned in my earlier post) that the “business admin” curriculum has been expanded AND dumbed down in many cases, the fact remains that there are some seriously rigorous courses of study in many schools. And I know many intelligent, accomplished scientists who would have been forced to withdraw from some of the classes I was required to take back in the ’70s.

So while it is tempting, and often great fun, to make blanket assumptions, it can get a bit old after a while when you’re under that blanket.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=jstoesz]Engineers can easily go into business and sales (assuming they have the personality for it)…business majors can not go into engineering. Enough said. [/quote]

Are you serious?? Perhaps you should explain precisely what you are referring to when you say “go into business”.

What, exactly, makes up the course of study for “going into business”? And are you saying that business majors are not capable of handling the level of academic studies assigned to engineering students?

Do you also believe that business majors cannot manage the academic demands of science majors?

While it is true (as I mentioned in my earlier post) that the “business admin” curriculum has been expanded AND dumbed down in many cases, the fact remains that there are some seriously rigorous courses of study in many schools. And I know many intelligent, accomplished scientists who would have been forced to withdraw from some of the classes I was required to take back in the ’70s.

So while it is tempting, and often great fun, to make blanket assumptions, it can get a bit old after a while when you’re under that blanket.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=jstoesz]Engineers can easily go into business and sales (assuming they have the personality for it)…business majors can not go into engineering. Enough said. [/quote]

Are you serious?? Perhaps you should explain precisely what you are referring to when you say “go into business”.

What, exactly, makes up the course of study for “going into business”? And are you saying that business majors are not capable of handling the level of academic studies assigned to engineering students?

Do you also believe that business majors cannot manage the academic demands of science majors?

While it is true (as I mentioned in my earlier post) that the “business admin” curriculum has been expanded AND dumbed down in many cases, the fact remains that there are some seriously rigorous courses of study in many schools. And I know many intelligent, accomplished scientists who would have been forced to withdraw from some of the classes I was required to take back in the ’70s.

So while it is tempting, and often great fun, to make blanket assumptions, it can get a bit old after a while when you’re under that blanket.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=jstoesz]Engineers can easily go into business and sales (assuming they have the personality for it)…business majors can not go into engineering. Enough said. [/quote]

Are you serious?? Perhaps you should explain precisely what you are referring to when you say “go into business”.

What, exactly, makes up the course of study for “going into business”? And are you saying that business majors are not capable of handling the level of academic studies assigned to engineering students?

Do you also believe that business majors cannot manage the academic demands of science majors?

While it is true (as I mentioned in my earlier post) that the “business admin” curriculum has been expanded AND dumbed down in many cases, the fact remains that there are some seriously rigorous courses of study in many schools. And I know many intelligent, accomplished scientists who would have been forced to withdraw from some of the classes I was required to take back in the ’70s.

So while it is tempting, and often great fun, to make blanket assumptions, it can get a bit old after a while when you’re under that blanket.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=jstoesz]Engineers can easily go into business and sales (assuming they have the personality for it)…business majors can not go into engineering. Enough said. [/quote]

Are you serious?? Perhaps you should explain precisely what you are referring to when you say “go into business”.

What, exactly, makes up the course of study for “going into business”? And are you saying that business majors are not capable of handling the level of academic studies assigned to engineering students?

Do you also believe that business majors cannot manage the academic demands of science majors?

While it is true (as I mentioned in my earlier post) that the “business admin” curriculum has been expanded AND dumbed down in many cases, the fact remains that there are some seriously rigorous courses of study in many schools. And I know many intelligent, accomplished scientists who would have been forced to withdraw from some of the classes I was required to take back in the ’70s.

So while it is tempting, and often great fun, to make blanket assumptions, it can get a bit old after a while when you’re under that blanket.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=briansd1]Excellent commentary, eveadropper. I love it that you consider different issues, such as eduction and economics when looking at politics.

Thank you for taking the time to write complete answers.

The problem with blogs and the Net is that we have become scatter-brained and just want headlines and simple answers.

The Net is about brevity because people don’t want to read long articles as they jump from page to page. I will read long articles, but I’m not good at writing long comments.

I’d love to hear more of your opinions on what’s fueling the bitterness and anger in politics these days.[/quote]

Brian: I will give you credit on this one. Every once in a while you post something that just nails it, and this is it. Excellent post, and it encapsulates a lot of my frustration with the “Post Fact World” we live in. Not enough time to delve into issues, or respond completely (or even coherently sometimes), all while dealing with the vitriol from those who don’t agree with your viewpoint (and I’m as guilty of this as anyone).[/quote]

Thanks, Brian. I’m not so concerned about the brevity of the net. After all, if someone brings something up that grabs my interest, but doesn’t elaborate much on the topic, I always have the option (if not the time) to go in search of more information myself. In fact, I really like the web for that reason. Wikipedia gets a bad rap, especially from educators (and I understand where they are coming from). But for an intelligent and high-achieving student, consulting with Wikipedia can give them an idea of what avenues to explore in a complex topic, and of how much weight should be given to certain aspects of the information they’ll locate.

No, what concerns me about the web is the amount of stuff that is totally fabricated, and the fact that a very large percentage of the population automatically assumes that it is true, and unquestioningly accepts it. But what really chaps my butt is not only the degree to which this false info is spread around by people who heartly endorse its supposed veracity, but that people who represent themselves as respected journalists use this stuff as “proof” in order to support their own opinions, and confirm their validity. It’s the equivalent of a gigantic chain letter.

For instance, I read an outrageous claim about the healthcare bill on an extreme right-wing blog. It was presented to the readers as gospel truth because it had been taken from an extensive analysis of the bill that had been performed by a well-respected highly intelligent individual who had worked in the “healthcare area”. I went in search of the original bill, and when I compared his “analysis” with it, it was immediately apparent that the author was neither intelligent or experienced in the health-care field. It was one piece of “conspiracy evidence” after another…absolutely absurd….written by a Joe-the-Plumber type named Peter Fleckenstein, who described himself as an “entrepreneur”. Yet, almost immediately, the right-wing blogs were full of this asshat’s claims, presented as “think tank-generated evidence”. To this day, I’m still seeing this shit used to scare the crap out of the average American, who apparently cannot perform 30 seconds of due diligence to check the validity of the info before forwarding it to someone else who needs to be frightened. Fleckenstein’s analysis, in one form or another, appears on virtually every well-known right-wing website, and quite a few left-wing ones. This, apparently, was enough to convince a U.S. Congressman of its validity, and he continues to use it to “educate” his constituents in speeches and in mailings.

This has been going on for so long, during which time the left, the Dems, and the mainstream press did nothing to call these liars out on their blatant violations of one of their sacrosanct Ten Commandments. Over time, they’ve taken it as society’s blanket tacit approval of their tactics, and believe that they have license to lie as blatantly and outrageously as they like. And our God-fearing, Bible-thumping leaders continue to present the lies as the truth.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=briansd1]Excellent commentary, eveadropper. I love it that you consider different issues, such as eduction and economics when looking at politics.

Thank you for taking the time to write complete answers.

The problem with blogs and the Net is that we have become scatter-brained and just want headlines and simple answers.

The Net is about brevity because people don’t want to read long articles as they jump from page to page. I will read long articles, but I’m not good at writing long comments.

I’d love to hear more of your opinions on what’s fueling the bitterness and anger in politics these days.[/quote]

Brian: I will give you credit on this one. Every once in a while you post something that just nails it, and this is it. Excellent post, and it encapsulates a lot of my frustration with the “Post Fact World” we live in. Not enough time to delve into issues, or respond completely (or even coherently sometimes), all while dealing with the vitriol from those who don’t agree with your viewpoint (and I’m as guilty of this as anyone).[/quote]

Thanks, Brian. I’m not so concerned about the brevity of the net. After all, if someone brings something up that grabs my interest, but doesn’t elaborate much on the topic, I always have the option (if not the time) to go in search of more information myself. In fact, I really like the web for that reason. Wikipedia gets a bad rap, especially from educators (and I understand where they are coming from). But for an intelligent and high-achieving student, consulting with Wikipedia can give them an idea of what avenues to explore in a complex topic, and of how much weight should be given to certain aspects of the information they’ll locate.

No, what concerns me about the web is the amount of stuff that is totally fabricated, and the fact that a very large percentage of the population automatically assumes that it is true, and unquestioningly accepts it. But what really chaps my butt is not only the degree to which this false info is spread around by people who heartly endorse its supposed veracity, but that people who represent themselves as respected journalists use this stuff as “proof” in order to support their own opinions, and confirm their validity. It’s the equivalent of a gigantic chain letter.

For instance, I read an outrageous claim about the healthcare bill on an extreme right-wing blog. It was presented to the readers as gospel truth because it had been taken from an extensive analysis of the bill that had been performed by a well-respected highly intelligent individual who had worked in the “healthcare area”. I went in search of the original bill, and when I compared his “analysis” with it, it was immediately apparent that the author was neither intelligent or experienced in the health-care field. It was one piece of “conspiracy evidence” after another…absolutely absurd….written by a Joe-the-Plumber type named Peter Fleckenstein, who described himself as an “entrepreneur”. Yet, almost immediately, the right-wing blogs were full of this asshat’s claims, presented as “think tank-generated evidence”. To this day, I’m still seeing this shit used to scare the crap out of the average American, who apparently cannot perform 30 seconds of due diligence to check the validity of the info before forwarding it to someone else who needs to be frightened. Fleckenstein’s analysis, in one form or another, appears on virtually every well-known right-wing website, and quite a few left-wing ones. This, apparently, was enough to convince a U.S. Congressman of its validity, and he continues to use it to “educate” his constituents in speeches and in mailings.

This has been going on for so long, during which time the left, the Dems, and the mainstream press did nothing to call these liars out on their blatant violations of one of their sacrosanct Ten Commandments. Over time, they’ve taken it as society’s blanket tacit approval of their tactics, and believe that they have license to lie as blatantly and outrageously as they like. And our God-fearing, Bible-thumping leaders continue to present the lies as the truth.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=briansd1]Excellent commentary, eveadropper. I love it that you consider different issues, such as eduction and economics when looking at politics.

Thank you for taking the time to write complete answers.

The problem with blogs and the Net is that we have become scatter-brained and just want headlines and simple answers.

The Net is about brevity because people don’t want to read long articles as they jump from page to page. I will read long articles, but I’m not good at writing long comments.

I’d love to hear more of your opinions on what’s fueling the bitterness and anger in politics these days.[/quote]

Brian: I will give you credit on this one. Every once in a while you post something that just nails it, and this is it. Excellent post, and it encapsulates a lot of my frustration with the “Post Fact World” we live in. Not enough time to delve into issues, or respond completely (or even coherently sometimes), all while dealing with the vitriol from those who don’t agree with your viewpoint (and I’m as guilty of this as anyone).[/quote]

Thanks, Brian. I’m not so concerned about the brevity of the net. After all, if someone brings something up that grabs my interest, but doesn’t elaborate much on the topic, I always have the option (if not the time) to go in search of more information myself. In fact, I really like the web for that reason. Wikipedia gets a bad rap, especially from educators (and I understand where they are coming from). But for an intelligent and high-achieving student, consulting with Wikipedia can give them an idea of what avenues to explore in a complex topic, and of how much weight should be given to certain aspects of the information they’ll locate.

No, what concerns me about the web is the amount of stuff that is totally fabricated, and the fact that a very large percentage of the population automatically assumes that it is true, and unquestioningly accepts it. But what really chaps my butt is not only the degree to which this false info is spread around by people who heartly endorse its supposed veracity, but that people who represent themselves as respected journalists use this stuff as “proof” in order to support their own opinions, and confirm their validity. It’s the equivalent of a gigantic chain letter.

For instance, I read an outrageous claim about the healthcare bill on an extreme right-wing blog. It was presented to the readers as gospel truth because it had been taken from an extensive analysis of the bill that had been performed by a well-respected highly intelligent individual who had worked in the “healthcare area”. I went in search of the original bill, and when I compared his “analysis” with it, it was immediately apparent that the author was neither intelligent or experienced in the health-care field. It was one piece of “conspiracy evidence” after another…absolutely absurd….written by a Joe-the-Plumber type named Peter Fleckenstein, who described himself as an “entrepreneur”. Yet, almost immediately, the right-wing blogs were full of this asshat’s claims, presented as “think tank-generated evidence”. To this day, I’m still seeing this shit used to scare the crap out of the average American, who apparently cannot perform 30 seconds of due diligence to check the validity of the info before forwarding it to someone else who needs to be frightened. Fleckenstein’s analysis, in one form or another, appears on virtually every well-known right-wing website, and quite a few left-wing ones. This, apparently, was enough to convince a U.S. Congressman of its validity, and he continues to use it to “educate” his constituents in speeches and in mailings.

This has been going on for so long, during which time the left, the Dems, and the mainstream press did nothing to call these liars out on their blatant violations of one of their sacrosanct Ten Commandments. Over time, they’ve taken it as society’s blanket tacit approval of their tactics, and believe that they have license to lie as blatantly and outrageously as they like. And our God-fearing, Bible-thumping leaders continue to present the lies as the truth.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=briansd1]Excellent commentary, eveadropper. I love it that you consider different issues, such as eduction and economics when looking at politics.

Thank you for taking the time to write complete answers.

The problem with blogs and the Net is that we have become scatter-brained and just want headlines and simple answers.

The Net is about brevity because people don’t want to read long articles as they jump from page to page. I will read long articles, but I’m not good at writing long comments.

I’d love to hear more of your opinions on what’s fueling the bitterness and anger in politics these days.[/quote]

Brian: I will give you credit on this one. Every once in a while you post something that just nails it, and this is it. Excellent post, and it encapsulates a lot of my frustration with the “Post Fact World” we live in. Not enough time to delve into issues, or respond completely (or even coherently sometimes), all while dealing with the vitriol from those who don’t agree with your viewpoint (and I’m as guilty of this as anyone).[/quote]

Thanks, Brian. I’m not so concerned about the brevity of the net. After all, if someone brings something up that grabs my interest, but doesn’t elaborate much on the topic, I always have the option (if not the time) to go in search of more information myself. In fact, I really like the web for that reason. Wikipedia gets a bad rap, especially from educators (and I understand where they are coming from). But for an intelligent and high-achieving student, consulting with Wikipedia can give them an idea of what avenues to explore in a complex topic, and of how much weight should be given to certain aspects of the information they’ll locate.

No, what concerns me about the web is the amount of stuff that is totally fabricated, and the fact that a very large percentage of the population automatically assumes that it is true, and unquestioningly accepts it. But what really chaps my butt is not only the degree to which this false info is spread around by people who heartly endorse its supposed veracity, but that people who represent themselves as respected journalists use this stuff as “proof” in order to support their own opinions, and confirm their validity. It’s the equivalent of a gigantic chain letter.

For instance, I read an outrageous claim about the healthcare bill on an extreme right-wing blog. It was presented to the readers as gospel truth because it had been taken from an extensive analysis of the bill that had been performed by a well-respected highly intelligent individual who had worked in the “healthcare area”. I went in search of the original bill, and when I compared his “analysis” with it, it was immediately apparent that the author was neither intelligent or experienced in the health-care field. It was one piece of “conspiracy evidence” after another…absolutely absurd….written by a Joe-the-Plumber type named Peter Fleckenstein, who described himself as an “entrepreneur”. Yet, almost immediately, the right-wing blogs were full of this asshat’s claims, presented as “think tank-generated evidence”. To this day, I’m still seeing this shit used to scare the crap out of the average American, who apparently cannot perform 30 seconds of due diligence to check the validity of the info before forwarding it to someone else who needs to be frightened. Fleckenstein’s analysis, in one form or another, appears on virtually every well-known right-wing website, and quite a few left-wing ones. This, apparently, was enough to convince a U.S. Congressman of its validity, and he continues to use it to “educate” his constituents in speeches and in mailings.

This has been going on for so long, during which time the left, the Dems, and the mainstream press did nothing to call these liars out on their blatant violations of one of their sacrosanct Ten Commandments. Over time, they’ve taken it as society’s blanket tacit approval of their tactics, and believe that they have license to lie as blatantly and outrageously as they like. And our God-fearing, Bible-thumping leaders continue to present the lies as the truth.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=briansd1]Excellent commentary, eveadropper. I love it that you consider different issues, such as eduction and economics when looking at politics.

Thank you for taking the time to write complete answers.

The problem with blogs and the Net is that we have become scatter-brained and just want headlines and simple answers.

The Net is about brevity because people don’t want to read long articles as they jump from page to page. I will read long articles, but I’m not good at writing long comments.

I’d love to hear more of your opinions on what’s fueling the bitterness and anger in politics these days.[/quote]

Brian: I will give you credit on this one. Every once in a while you post something that just nails it, and this is it. Excellent post, and it encapsulates a lot of my frustration with the “Post Fact World” we live in. Not enough time to delve into issues, or respond completely (or even coherently sometimes), all while dealing with the vitriol from those who don’t agree with your viewpoint (and I’m as guilty of this as anyone).[/quote]

Thanks, Brian. I’m not so concerned about the brevity of the net. After all, if someone brings something up that grabs my interest, but doesn’t elaborate much on the topic, I always have the option (if not the time) to go in search of more information myself. In fact, I really like the web for that reason. Wikipedia gets a bad rap, especially from educators (and I understand where they are coming from). But for an intelligent and high-achieving student, consulting with Wikipedia can give them an idea of what avenues to explore in a complex topic, and of how much weight should be given to certain aspects of the information they’ll locate.

No, what concerns me about the web is the amount of stuff that is totally fabricated, and the fact that a very large percentage of the population automatically assumes that it is true, and unquestioningly accepts it. But what really chaps my butt is not only the degree to which this false info is spread around by people who heartly endorse its supposed veracity, but that people who represent themselves as respected journalists use this stuff as “proof” in order to support their own opinions, and confirm their validity. It’s the equivalent of a gigantic chain letter.

For instance, I read an outrageous claim about the healthcare bill on an extreme right-wing blog. It was presented to the readers as gospel truth because it had been taken from an extensive analysis of the bill that had been performed by a well-respected highly intelligent individual who had worked in the “healthcare area”. I went in search of the original bill, and when I compared his “analysis” with it, it was immediately apparent that the author was neither intelligent or experienced in the health-care field. It was one piece of “conspiracy evidence” after another…absolutely absurd….written by a Joe-the-Plumber type named Peter Fleckenstein, who described himself as an “entrepreneur”. Yet, almost immediately, the right-wing blogs were full of this asshat’s claims, presented as “think tank-generated evidence”. To this day, I’m still seeing this shit used to scare the crap out of the average American, who apparently cannot perform 30 seconds of due diligence to check the validity of the info before forwarding it to someone else who needs to be frightened. Fleckenstein’s analysis, in one form or another, appears on virtually every well-known right-wing website, and quite a few left-wing ones. This, apparently, was enough to convince a U.S. Congressman of its validity, and he continues to use it to “educate” his constituents in speeches and in mailings.

This has been going on for so long, during which time the left, the Dems, and the mainstream press did nothing to call these liars out on their blatant violations of one of their sacrosanct Ten Commandments. Over time, they’ve taken it as society’s blanket tacit approval of their tactics, and believe that they have license to lie as blatantly and outrageously as they like. And our God-fearing, Bible-thumping leaders continue to present the lies as the truth.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=eavesdropper] Does this sound better:

“Je vous en prie, mon énorme sac de merde parfumée!”

I would never waste a language like French on insults. Besides, I’m sure that you are confident in my abilities to accomplish that quite effectively in English.[/quote]

Eaves: Yes, being referred to as a bag of sweet smelling shit is MUCH better!
[/quote]

My point exactly, Allan! At least I didn’t refer to you as “my little cabbage”, which is an error I come upon frequently in books and articles (“mon petit chou”). At least I’m assuming that it’s an error.

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] Of course, if we’re moving towards the scatological, German is so superior. Alles ist bescheissen really conveys it much more graphically (and gutturally) than French, which is a much prettier language.[/quote]

Yes, I confess. Not much that’s more satisfying than cursing in German.

At the same time, there are quite a few very lovely expressions of endearment in German. Rather contradictory language in its expressiveness.

Alas, I am illiterate in Deutsch.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=eavesdropper] Does this sound better:

“Je vous en prie, mon énorme sac de merde parfumée!”

I would never waste a language like French on insults. Besides, I’m sure that you are confident in my abilities to accomplish that quite effectively in English.[/quote]

Eaves: Yes, being referred to as a bag of sweet smelling shit is MUCH better!
[/quote]

My point exactly, Allan! At least I didn’t refer to you as “my little cabbage”, which is an error I come upon frequently in books and articles (“mon petit chou”). At least I’m assuming that it’s an error.

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] Of course, if we’re moving towards the scatological, German is so superior. Alles ist bescheissen really conveys it much more graphically (and gutturally) than French, which is a much prettier language.[/quote]

Yes, I confess. Not much that’s more satisfying than cursing in German.

At the same time, there are quite a few very lovely expressions of endearment in German. Rather contradictory language in its expressiveness.

Alas, I am illiterate in Deutsch.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=eavesdropper] Does this sound better:

“Je vous en prie, mon énorme sac de merde parfumée!”

I would never waste a language like French on insults. Besides, I’m sure that you are confident in my abilities to accomplish that quite effectively in English.[/quote]

Eaves: Yes, being referred to as a bag of sweet smelling shit is MUCH better!
[/quote]

My point exactly, Allan! At least I didn’t refer to you as “my little cabbage”, which is an error I come upon frequently in books and articles (“mon petit chou”). At least I’m assuming that it’s an error.

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] Of course, if we’re moving towards the scatological, German is so superior. Alles ist bescheissen really conveys it much more graphically (and gutturally) than French, which is a much prettier language.[/quote]

Yes, I confess. Not much that’s more satisfying than cursing in German.

At the same time, there are quite a few very lovely expressions of endearment in German. Rather contradictory language in its expressiveness.

Alas, I am illiterate in Deutsch.

[Author]

Posts