5 ms·

I'd be an economics teacher. I'd love to teach High School and/or College economics. Since this is my own fantasy land, I'd be able to set my own curriculum.

I'd be an economics teacher. I'd love to teach High School and/or College economics. Since this is my own fantasy land, I'd be able to set my own curriculum. 1. Why do we work? (Jobs, Businesses, and the individual economy) 2. What is wealth, and how do I get it? (Saving, investment, real estate) 3. Is it supposed to be like this? (Capitalism, Government, modern political economy) 4. Systems Design (If you want to change the system, how should it work? How do we measure things that aren't money? Love, time, attention?) I wish I'd had an education like this earlier in life.

grenoire 10y ago
Higher education in economics quickly ramps up to using actual mathematics. Your curriculum is more in line with high school or International Baccalaureate styled diplomas, with a focus on the "old" philosophical economics.
- romgrk 10y ago
  https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/mathematical-economics-training-too-narrow-by-robert-skidelsky-2016-12 https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/mathematical-ec...
- fsargent 10y ago
  Yeah, absolutely. More of a "Home Economics" tint to it, but something I feel most people are missing in life. I feel the math should be used to prove the philosophical points. It's rare that the math actually improves understanding without a novel hypothesis behind it.
Retric 10y ago
Economics 101 seems completely useless as taught, but it's just there so people understand the jargon. Unfortunately, it's often a general elective so that foundation wasted. So, I can see plenty of ways to make it useful. What is wealth? Things people want. Money = wealth not because it's directly useful but because people want it so you can trade it for things you want. Why do people want Money? Taxes, and loans. If you sell stock to buy a car, you need extra money to hand to the government. Further, if you have a mortgage or credit cards you need to come up with cash on a very regular basis. Then build on this: What is the demand curve? Different people are willing to pay more or less and buy more or less of the same things. ex: 3rd car. However, you would be much better making this into a book than teaching a class. As again Econ 101 is setup so people can do a lot of math in Econ 301.
- MooBah 10y ago
  Completely disagree.. Common people should know the philosophy which shaped the government thinks about their lives and productivity. Yes econ is not a true science, because it is mostly conjecture supported by handpicked data, but at the same time, it is the only template we have created to think about the complex interactions in the competitive marketplace. The power of the competitive market is the foundation for all capitalist action, economics is a way to understand how markets intersect and interact.
  - Retric 10y ago
    I am not sure what your getting at. My point is you can use definitions that are more intuitive while teaching the same topics. Do a search and: The demand curve is a graphical representation of the relationship between the price of a good or service and the quantity demanded for a given period of time. In a typical representation, the price will appear on the left vertical axis, the quantity demanded on the horizontal axis. -This means nothing to most people. "What is the demand curve? Different people are willing to pay more or less and buy more or of the same things. ex: 3rd car, water for a bathtub vs water for a swimming pool." -Sounds like something you might recall in 10 years. I am all for talking about the laffer curve as more than as math. You can also talk about it as society breaks down and a black market grows. It's still economics as it relates to society it's also meaningful to people. For comparison CIS 101 is often this is how you use Excel and somewhat useful to most students, but also not really a foundation for a CS degree.
scarecrowbob 10y ago
If I had to make a living outside of programming, I think that teaching would be one possibility. I taught for a 6 years at a large state university and took my certification qualification exam. My parents are both career teachers, and my wife makes a really nice living teaching. That said, there is no way that I can see myself doing it in the context of a high school or college. High schools (at least the several that I have subbed at, and I have a couple of teenagers, so I've been on that side of it too) are really crappy "Lord of the Flies" kinds of places. Colleges are better, but there are similar structural problems to being a musician: it's basically no pay for a big sector of the population, plus you still have an institution around your students. The best model that I have seen is private students; my wife has 40 violin students (plus her general business of being a musician, plus teaching with a couple of local youth orchestras) and makes a very good living. There is no reason that you can't apply the same principles to teaching any subject. I asked around, and there was a high demand for folks who wanted me to teach their kids how to program. I imagine that if there were a bigger population, I'd be able to find enough folks to put together seminars on the same stuff I was teaching at the university. At that point, setting your own curriculum is part of the job and not a fantasy.
michaelbrave 10y ago
I'd be interested in that, perhaps in book form.

grenoire 10y ago

Higher education in economics quickly ramps up to using actual mathematics. Your curriculum is more in line with high school or International Baccalaureate styled diplomas, with a focus on the "old" philosophical economics.

romgrk 10y ago
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/mathematical-economics-training-too-narrow-by-robert-skidelsky-2016-12 https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/mathematical-ec...
fsargent 10y ago
Yeah, absolutely. More of a "Home Economics" tint to it, but something I feel most people are missing in life. I feel the math should be used to prove the philosophical points. It's rare that the math actually improves understanding without a novel hypothesis behind it.

Retric 10y ago

Economics 101 seems completely useless as taught, but it's just there so people understand the jargon. Unfortunately, it's often a general elective so that foundation wasted. So, I can see plenty of ways to make it useful. What is wealth? Things people want. Money = wealth not because it's directly useful but because people want it so you can trade it for things you want. Why do people want Money? Taxes, and loans. If you sell stock to buy a car, you need extra money to hand to the government. Further, if you have a mortgage or credit cards you need to come up with cash on a very regular basis. Then build on this: What is the demand curve? Different people are willing to pay more or less and buy more or less of the same things. ex: 3rd car. However, you would be much better making this into a book than teaching a class. As again Econ 101 is setup so people can do a lot of math in Econ 301.

MooBah 10y ago
Completely disagree.. Common people should know the philosophy which shaped the government thinks about their lives and productivity. Yes econ is not a true science, because it is mostly conjecture supported by handpicked data, but at the same time, it is the only template we have created to think about the complex interactions in the competitive marketplace. The power of the competitive market is the foundation for all capitalist action, economics is a way to understand how markets intersect and interact.
- Retric 10y ago
  I am not sure what your getting at. My point is you can use definitions that are more intuitive while teaching the same topics. Do a search and: The demand curve is a graphical representation of the relationship between the price of a good or service and the quantity demanded for a given period of time. In a typical representation, the price will appear on the left vertical axis, the quantity demanded on the horizontal axis. -This means nothing to most people. "What is the demand curve? Different people are willing to pay more or less and buy more or of the same things. ex: 3rd car, water for a bathtub vs water for a swimming pool." -Sounds like something you might recall in 10 years. I am all for talking about the laffer curve as more than as math. You can also talk about it as society breaks down and a black market grows. It's still economics as it relates to society it's also meaningful to people. For comparison CIS 101 is often this is how you use Excel and somewhat useful to most students, but also not really a foundation for a CS degree.

scarecrowbob 10y ago

If I had to make a living outside of programming, I think that teaching would be one possibility. I taught for a 6 years at a large state university and took my certification qualification exam. My parents are both career teachers, and my wife makes a really nice living teaching. That said, there is no way that I can see myself doing it in the context of a high school or college. High schools (at least the several that I have subbed at, and I have a couple of teenagers, so I've been on that side of it too) are really crappy "Lord of the Flies" kinds of places. Colleges are better, but there are similar structural problems to being a musician: it's basically no pay for a big sector of the population, plus you still have an institution around your students. The best model that I have seen is private students; my wife has 40 violin students (plus her general business of being a musician, plus teaching with a couple of local youth orchestras) and makes a very good living. There is no reason that you can't apply the same principles to teaching any subject. I asked around, and there was a high demand for folks who wanted me to teach their kids how to program. I imagine that if there were a bigger population, I'd be able to find enough folks to put together seminars on the same stuff I was teaching at the university. At that point, setting your own curriculum is part of the job and not a fantasy.

michaelbrave 10y ago

I'd be interested in that, perhaps in book form.