HOw is a "system of inequalities' used in everyday life?
542346
haha good question :]\nwe're just studied those in math, and a lot of our problems had "real-life" situations, so i'll just give you some examples of them.\n"A farmer has at most 80 acres for which to plant two crops, corn and wheat. Planting and harvesting cots, for which no more than a total of $12,000 is available, are $300/acre for corn and $100/acre for wheat. How many acres of each crop would you suggest he plant?"\n"Ken is planning a picnic for the youth orchestra. He is going to make chicken sandwiches and egg salad sandwiches. He will make no more than 20 sandwiches, because many people may bring their own. He figures that the number of chicken sandwiches should be at least twice as many as the number of egg salad sandwiches. Ken says that there is only enough chicken for 16 chicken sandwiches. He says that there should be at least 2 egg sandwiches..."\nI think these could be times in which you could use a system of inequalities. I guess if you had time to calculate it all...\n<333
380324
Unfortunately we will always have inequalities...it is the way of the world....it the way capitalism works....we have different socioeconomic statuses the haves and the have nots...someone has to work to make people richer and someone has to lead to make the masses want more things to buy...we will always have poor and will always have rich...the most unfortunate part is the gap between the two classes is growing larger.
898785
It is the most used in daily life. Lots of algebra and other higher maths are not used daily by the ave. person but ave is.
15724
not an easy answer, I would recommend reading "The Status Seekers" by Vance Packard, or the scaled down version (it is just selections from the book) "American Social Classes in the 1950's", edited by Daniel Horowitz
236397
It is the only way to ensure equal economic opportunity.  All other systems try to make equallity of outcome, which is impossible.  Even at it's best socialism and communism stifles innovation and opportunity.
325405
People do not always start equal.  Case in point, A kid in Beverly Hills whose Dad or Mom chooses not to work because one income can cover the house is miles ahead of a kid whose parents both work and still can't afford to feed the family.  \n\nThe kid who is rich never has to worry about clothes for a job interview, while the other kid has to struggle to eat.  Who would you hire?  That's assuming everything else is equal. (which it won't be).\n\nYes it can balance out, but it's much harder to climb a mountain without the intial equipment than it is with it.
538748
Yes, but you need to account for two cases. The full solution:\n\n(x-1) / (x-10) < 0\n\nx-1 < 0 [if x > 10] OR\nx-1 > 0 [if x < 10] (by "flip the sign" rule; x cannot be 10)\n\nFirst inequality can never be satisfied.\nSecond inequality means 10 > x > 1.\n\nYou do not use foil for that.\n\nClassical (and Kemmy) probably interpreted it as a number/phase line, which can be faster in a simple case like this. For more difficult inequalities it's best to write out steps.
921144
Poverty and inequality
578062
use the properties of equalities and inequalities.\n(subraction,additon,multiplication,division).
945025
If you skip over the qualified for the less qualified it is unfair to all of us as a society.  How is it treating people equally when you don't reat them equally????  You look at the sex, nationality origin, physical characteristics or skin color and say... YES I PICK YOU because you're white, a woman and have a limp...\n\nNO way in any stretch of the imagination are you then treating people EQUALLY!
980095
Classical five-point discrete evaluation is the system most commonly used in the United States, but there are many variations. There are also a few schools, colleges and universities that eschew discrete evaluation (letter grading) in favor of pure discursive evaluation.\n\nHere is a common example of an American quality index, showing letter grade, qualitative definition and correlative quantitative value.\n\n    * A = Excellent or Superior; or top 10% (90 to 100, of 100) = 4.00\n    * B = Above Average or Above Average Expectation; or second 10% (80-89) = 3.00\n    * C = Average or Average Expectation; or third 10% (70-79) = 2.00\n    * D = Below average but passing (60-69) = 1.00\n    * F (or E): Failure or Exceptionally Poor; or bottom 60% (0-59) = 0.00\n\n\nso 2.8 is between B/C
489829
Stupidity is everywhere. That is egalitarian! So is broadcast snooze\n\nDisparity: wealth, health care, shelter, education and influence
609404
When people choose this. As soon as society truly, fully CHOOSES this. This change needs to start (and has started) in the home, with the individual, with every action that places emphasis on equality of individuals above social, political, or financial stature.\n\nThis is a slow process; working with it, encouraging it, and re-supporting it with every decision will eventually manifest that reality. Patience is key here.
721303
Your comment reminds me of a Star Trek episode.  There is a planet on which most of the population has to work in harsh mining conditions to support the Cloud City Dwellers, a fantastically advanced city that floats above the planet.  The hard work of the people on the planet surface support the fortunate cloud city inhabitants.  The workers below live a harsh, unpleasant life.  The people in the floating city live a life of luxury.\n\nIt is the lower castes in India that make possible the life the elites there enjoy.\n\nAs you can see, I carefully sidestepped your question. Why? Because your supposition may be, in the short term, correct. India may not benefit globally in the short run, but eventually it will have to address this permanent underclass and fix these inequalities.
651270
depends on the tribe. most native american tribes have no word for it. they have no words for anything that suggest inequality, as it was a concept that was alien to them.
671503
People taking advantage of the system
204388
Equity in economics is related to the idea of fairness, particularly in terms of taxation and welfare economics. It has been studied in experimental economics as inequity aversion.\n\nHorizontal equity is the idea that people with a similar ability to pay taxes should pay the same or similar amounts. It is related to the concept of tax neutrality or the idea that the tax system should not discriminate between similar things or people, or unduly distort behavior.\n\nVertical equity is the idea that people with a greater ability to pay taxes should pay more. If they pay more strictly in proportion to their income, this is known as a proportional tax or flat tax; if they pay disproportionately more then this is a progressive tax, more associated with redistribution.