I mean.. they did loan the money, with all the associated responsibilities and risks of loaning money. And they did do the work. All the agreements were entered voluntarily, so what's the fault here?
The best option.. for what? To live in? To invest in? To look at? Besides, isn't it incredibly personal? What's the best option for someone, might be a poor option for someone else.
I did not think that the point of the article is to complain about award withholding from Asian students.. although the attribution of race seems misplaced.
I thought the point was about the loss of meritocracy and the redefinition of what it means to fail. And grading work on a 50-100 scale.. you really don't think that's weird?
This is a possible outcome. However, another possibility is that not all children are of the same aptitude, and therefore your experience might not be representative of their.
Lots of talk about reform and transformation but light in detail on what the desired changes are. Triple down on One China policy, but multiple mentions of special status of HK/Macau. Anyone got any additional insight?
I think the person you're responding to is talking about USSR circa 1920-1980, and you're talking about RF 2010-2020. Of course you can say that it's all the same, but then why would you be agreeing with them 10 years ago?