BS: The New 'Enron' Math

Subject: The New 'Enron' Math
From: katlaughing
Date: 14 Mar 02 - 11:35 PM

From an email, today:

TEACHING MATH

Teaching Math in 1950 ===================== A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price. What is his profit?

Teaching Math in 1960 ===================== A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price, or $80. What is his profit?

Teaching Math in 1970 ===================== A logger exchanges a set "L" of lumber for a set "M" of money. The cardinality of set "M" is 100. Each element is worth one dollar. Make 100 dots representing the elements of the set "M." The set "C," the cost of production contains 20 fewer points than set "M." Represent the set "C" as a subset of set "M" and answer the following question: What is the cardinality of the set "P" of profits?

Teaching Math in 1980 ===================== A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20. Your assignment: Underline the number 20.

Teaching Math in 1990 ===================== By cutting down beautiful forest trees, the logger makes $20. What do you think of this way of making a living? Topic for class participation after answering the question: How did the forest birds and squirrels feel as the logger cut down the trees? There are no wrong answers.

Teaching Math in 2002 ===================== A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100, and his customer sells him back a tank of diesel fuel for $100. His cost of production is $120, and his net partnership takeaway is computed at $600 by booking the sale before the lumber is used for construction. How does Arthur Andersen determine that his profit margin is $0, and that he sees no tax implication and is, in fact, due a federal subsidy? Show your work, then destroy it.

Subject: RE: BS: The New 'Enron' Math
From: Sorcha
Date: 14 Mar 02 - 11:48 PM

ROFLMAO!!!!Too bad it's too true.

Subject: RE: BS: The New 'Enron' Math
From: Harold W
Date: 15 Mar 02 - 12:53 AM

Great demonstration of the evolution of math (or should it be devolution? Do the math).

Subject: RE: BS: The New 'Enron' Math
From: Hrothgar
Date: 15 Mar 02 - 04:08 AM

You want to watch your back. If you keep distributing stuff like that, your days could be numbered.

Subject: RE: BS: The New 'Enron' Math
From: Hrothgar
Date: 15 Mar 02 - 05:20 AM

You want to watch your back. If you keep distributing stuff like that, your days could be numbered.

Subject: RE: BS: The New 'Enron' Math
From: katlaughing
Date: 15 Mar 02 - 10:43 AM

Gee thanks, Hrothgar, now i know what it all adds up to!

Subject: RE: BS: The New 'Enron' Math
From: RichM
Date: 15 Mar 02 - 10:49 AM

Basic Math in the Third Millenium: 1 + 1 doesn't always equal 2.
Ask any accountant (I know, I'm one)

Subject: RE: BS: The New 'Enron' Math
From: catspaw49
Date: 15 Mar 02 - 11:45 AM

The first part of that was very popular when I was teaching kat. It didn't use lumber but something equally simple in word problems. At that time however it was meant to point out (as it still does along with the Enron Debacle) where our educational system has gone. Very funny in this application but still an equal indictment of the problems in education.

Education: The inculcation of the incomprehensible into the indifferent by the incompetent to the unconscious.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: The New 'Enron' Math
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 16 Mar 02 - 11:15 AM

2 + 2 = 3

(for extremely small values of 2)

Subject: RE: BS: The New 'Enron' Math
From: DMcG
Date: 16 Mar 02 - 12:24 PM

George Orwell: Freedom is the right to say 2+2=4. If that is granted, all else follows

RichM: That's why accountants are never free!

Subject: RE: BS: The New 'Enron' Math
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Mar 02 - 12:33 PM

I have thought that freedom would be the right to say 2+2=5

Subject: RE: BS: The New 'Enron' Math
From: DMcG
Date: 16 Mar 02 - 12:45 PM

Well, GUEST, I admit 2+2=4 as a definition of freedom does lose more than a little out of context. Its from "1984" and I wouldn't dare to summarise why 2+2=4 is a more fundamental freedom than 2+2=5 beyond that it is when you are not even free to voice agreement to a generally accepted truth without feeling at risk. If you haven't read the book, now's the time! But this is getting rather off thread ...

Subject: RE: BS: The New 'Enron' Math
From: gnu
Date: 16 Mar 02 - 03:38 PM

Government subsidy - kickback = immunity.

Subject: RE: BS: The New 'Enron' Math
From: Hrothgar
Date: 17 Mar 02 - 05:05 AM

This bloke wanted to hire an accountant. He advertised, and selected three applicants for interview. He went through the interview with the first one, and finished with a question, "What is 2 plus 2?"

The applicant said "4" and the bloke said "We'll let you know."

He went through the interview with the second one, and finished with the question. "What is 2 plus 2?"

The applicant said "I think it's 4, but I'll get out my calculator and make certain...yes, it's 4." The bloke said "We'll let you know."

He went through the interview with the third one, and finished with the question, "What is 2 plus 2?"

The applicant said "How much do you want it to be?"

He got the job.