@Foxfyre,
Quote:
How can you say that with certainty? Would you like to show your future employer that C or D or F you got as proof that you obtained knowledge?
When you remove the grade as an indicator of knowledge achieved/effort expended, why would the superior student study like crazy if he was going to fail anyway? He would still receive an "F" no matter how much he studied. If it was knowledge he wanted, most would figure they could get that with a lot less hassle and in a way that would have a whole lot more credibility.
As others have stated, the vast majority of employers could give two shits about one's grades, as long as you graduated.
There are also major problems with the idea that an averaging of student grades would ever give a 'f' average, in the first place. An 'F' is less than 70% correct, under most grading schemes; in order to average less than that, there can be very few grades higher than an F. This is extremely unlikely as in any given class there will be several who will achieve high grades no matter what.
Quote:
Now you take a small business owner who is offered a nice contract, but if he accepts it he will push himself into a substantially higher tax bracket and subject himself to all manner of government regulations, mandates, and red tape that he doesn't have as a Mom & Pop operation. He decides he doesn't need the aggravation or the reduced income so he doesn't hire the half dozen people he would have otherwise hired. And the next guy lays off a few employees to keep himself under the threshhold where the government would have socked it to him.
Paragraphs like this make me wonder if you know anything at all about taxes. As Parados pointed out, higher tax brackets only affect the monies made over that level. So keeping yourself under that point doesn't save you money - under any calculation.
If business owners don't wish to go through the hassles of becoming bigger businesses, and the things that go with that - that isn't an indicator of a problem with the regulations, it's a decision on the part of the mom and pop business owner and a judgment that it isn't worth it to them. Your paragraph somehow judges this as a bad thing. It isn't. If people don't want their business to grow, that's their own decision; looking at the jobs they 'could have had' is a little asinine, every company could provide more or less jobs, that's not a reason to make policy.
Cycloptichorn