3 ms·

Assuming that normies cannot understand gradients or feedback loops is IMO the source of a large amount of "tactical-level" problems in society, particularly ar

Assuming that normies cannot understand gradients or feedback loops is IMO the source of a large amount of "tactical-level" problems in society, particularly around healthcare, taxation, and politics. The better alternative would be to assume that normies are, in fact, capable of understanding these tools, and in the process forcing them to understand them by setting an expectation. I mean, this is what people should be told as answer when they ask, "what will learning math be useful for me in my life?". No, multiplying polynomials will not be useful to 99% of the people. But having a feel for basic linear algebra and feedback loops would be, because they describe the behavior of the simple and interesting control systems in any and all areas of life - which includes the Social Security examples of yours, too. The worst thing is, letting majority of people off the hook here doesn't just impact them individually; in democracies, it prevents systems require certain level of understanding from being created in the first place. As shown in plenty of examples brought up in the discussion thread here. So I guess one answer to "how is any of that math going to be useful for me in the future?" is, "if you all learn it, it will allow you to stop keeping yourselves in poverty in stupid and entirely unintentional ways".

toast0 4mo ago
Given that normies don't geneally understand tax brackets, I can understand not wanting to do more complex stuff either. I don't know how many people I've heard express that they didn't want to move into the next tax bracket because they didn't want to pay that rate on their whole income, but it's a lot. A very small minority are worried about hitting a ceiling that removes eligibility for important services, and some are worried about the weird phaseouts where marginal rates are very high, but most just don't understand. Maybe that means having a more complicated system is fine because it's already incomprehensible to most, but I dunno.
- int_19h 4mo ago
  Tax brackets are very easy to explain, it doesn't even require math beyond basic arithmetics. You can draw a bunch of lines on paper and show how different slices are taken from each. The problem is that the intuitive understanding doesn't line up with that, so that's what people have by default - and then we don't teach how it actually works as a basic skill! Sure, there's no shortage of explainers, but you need to be actually looking for them in the first place. And the best way to teach that in school? Give students a small allowance that grows with each year, but they have to "pay taxes" on it to continue receiving it, complete with different brackets etc. I bet you that all the "normie" kids will figure it out in no time.
ben_w 4mo ago
FWIW, I didn't understand tax brackets when I was at university because nobody had bothered to explain them. I absolutely started off with the common misconception that on the margin going from e.g. the 20% bracket to the 40% bracket would double my tax bill. The UK didn't have civics classes in school; I think this would have been much more useful than my mandatory RE lessons with an exam centred on one of the gospels.

toast0 4mo ago

Given that normies don't geneally understand tax brackets, I can understand not wanting to do more complex stuff either. I don't know how many people I've heard express that they didn't want to move into the next tax bracket because they didn't want to pay that rate on their whole income, but it's a lot. A very small minority are worried about hitting a ceiling that removes eligibility for important services, and some are worried about the weird phaseouts where marginal rates are very high, but most just don't understand. Maybe that means having a more complicated system is fine because it's already incomprehensible to most, but I dunno.

int_19h 4mo ago
Tax brackets are very easy to explain, it doesn't even require math beyond basic arithmetics. You can draw a bunch of lines on paper and show how different slices are taken from each. The problem is that the intuitive understanding doesn't line up with that, so that's what people have by default - and then we don't teach how it actually works as a basic skill! Sure, there's no shortage of explainers, but you need to be actually looking for them in the first place. And the best way to teach that in school? Give students a small allowance that grows with each year, but they have to "pay taxes" on it to continue receiving it, complete with different brackets etc. I bet you that all the "normie" kids will figure it out in no time.

ben_w 4mo ago

FWIW, I didn't understand tax brackets when I was at university because nobody had bothered to explain them. I absolutely started off with the common misconception that on the margin going from e.g. the 20% bracket to the 40% bracket would double my tax bill. The UK didn't have civics classes in school; I think this would have been much more useful than my mandatory RE lessons with an exam centred on one of the gospels.