• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

World Politics

Page 303 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hugh Januss said:
Public schools are floundering not because teachers are lazy, stupid and evil, but because inner city schools are overcrowded, underfunded and dangerous, I don't understand how your vaunted competition is gonna help that, other than maybe you will just be able to pretend those schools no longer exist at all, since they obviously won't be able to "compete".
I was just joking to see if anybody was paying attention. Everyone knows competition never works. Just look at cycling... there can only be one winner. That's just patently unfair.

I think the inner city schools just need more money. That's the real root of the problem with education. Here's an idea: a new school tax on the super-wealthy. That should take care of it.

Anyone else with a problem? Because I have a solution, no matter what it is.







Wait for it...






A new wealth tax!

Wealth tax = problem solver. I learned that on this thread.
 
May 13, 2009
3,042
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
I was just joking to see if anybody was paying attention. Everyone knows competition never works. Just look at cycling... there can only be one winner. That's just patently unfair.
In terms of an education system, to produce one single winner and everybody else is a loser would be monumental stupidity. But I know that's not what you meant here.

The thing is, a system based on the wealth of the parents is not only unfair, it's inefficient. Of course rich parents like it, because it perpetuates class differences. But think about the enormous talent pool which remains untapped because a good education is out of reach for a lot of children. This is the true inefficiency. If you really are concerned about waste of tax money, you should be against a system which mostly benefits children of rich people, regardless of their academic merit.
 
Jul 9, 2009
6,625
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
I was just joking to see if anybody was paying attention. Everyone knows competition never works. Just look at cycling... there can only be one winner. That's just patently unfair.

I think the inner city schools just need more money. That's the real root of the problem with education. Here's an idea: a new school tax on the super-wealthy. That should take care of it.

Anyone else with a problem? Because I have a solution, no matter what it is.







Wait for it...






A new wealth tax!

Wealth tax = problem solver. I learned that on this thread.
I believe I am beginning to see the light



















Red is right
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Cobblestones said:
Schools kind of compete already. One of the important factors in real estate is location in a good school district. Local government is usually VERY interested in maintaining a high standard of their public schools.

Charter schools in average do not produce better results than public schools. Both produce low to average results in international comparisons. You need to lift academic qualifications of teachers, in particular for the high school sector. You can't have the phys.-ed. teacher teach physics, because it sounds similar. You need someone with a MSc degree in physics to do this effectively, on a high level. Neither public, nor charter schools do that, because they're both operating with similar budgets per student (unless the charter school gets private grants).

Private schools which can charge whatever they want (as long as they find parents who can pay), don't have that constraint and can deliver better results. But hardly anyone can afford them.

Let's turn it around. If you only have a given amount per student, there's a maximum which you get in return. $5000 doesn't buy you a Mercedes, never mind how effective the dealership works. A voucher program or charter schools won't change that. You just have one WalMart compete with another one. The point that most charter schools don't outperform public schools just shows the limitations of the system. It doesn't support the claim that public schools are inefficient in general.

It's just that you get what you pay for.
Yeah... not so much.

the Los Angeles Unified School District spent $29,780 per student in fiscal year 2007-08. That’s way above the $10,000 as advertised by the school district, and as used in most studies.

The $29,780 per student figure means a class of 25 students would spend $744,500 a year.
You can buy a fleet of Benz's for three quarters of a million per year per class room.

For its $29,780 spent per student, LAUSD’s graduation rate is 40.6 percent, second worst in the country.
Ah, well. There's really nothing that can be done...

http://www.calwatchdog.com/2010/08/20/lausd-spends-30k-per-student/

I'm sure the source will come into question... so since everyone's hackles are up I'll post this;

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa662.pdf

Although public schools are usually the biggest item in state and local budgets, spending figures provided by public school officials and
reported in the media often leave out major costs of education and thus understate what is actually spent. To document the phenomenon, this paper
reviews district budgets and state records for the nation’s five largest metro areas and the District of Columbia. It reveals that, on average, per-pupil
spending in these areas is 44 percent higher than officially reported.
Real spending per pupil ranges from a low of nearly $12,000 in the Phoenix area schools to a high of nearly $27,000 in the New York metro area. The gap between real and reported per-pupil spending ranges from a low of 23 percent in the Chicago area to a high of 90 percent in the Los Angeles metro region. To put public school spending in perspective, we compare it to estimated total expenditures in local private schools. We find that, in the areas studied, public schools are spending 93 percent more than the estimated median private school. Citizens drastically underestimate current per-student spending and are misled by official figures. Taxpayers cannot make informed decisions about public school funding unless they
know how much districts currently spend. And with state budgets stretched thin, it is more crucial than ever to carefully allocate every tax dollar.
This paper therefore presents model legislation that would bring transparency to school district budgets and enable citizens and legislators to hold the K–12 public education system accountable.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Cobblestones said:
In terms of an education system, to produce one single winner and everybody else is a loser would be monumental stupidity. But I know that's not what you meant here.

The thing is, a system based on the wealth of the parents is not only unfair, it's inefficient. Of course rich parents like it, because it perpetuates class differences. But think about the enormous talent pool which remains untapped because a good education is out of reach for a lot of children. This is the true inefficiency. If you really are concerned about waste of tax money, you should be against a system which mostly benefits children of rich people, regardless of their academic merit.

Bingo.

This is the tragedy of our current situation.

If public schools can do a great job then I really will be thrilled. I don't really care what or whom educates the kids... I'd just like to see it happen.

If you really are concerned about waste of tax money, you should be against a system which mostly benefits children of rich people, regardless of their academic merit
I'm really concerned about the waste of tax dollars and I'm really concerned about the state of our education system for all kids.
 
Scott SoCal said:
Well now you are just being an A-Hole. What you "forget" to mention is that I was drawing a distinction compared to inflation, hence the annualized percentages. You also forget to mention this was in the context of Cobblestones mentioning cutting discretionary spending and me mentioning the big money that's being spent on entitlements... I mean, I posted the chart showing you (and everyone else) the freaking numbers. What was I hiding? NOTHING. I also list defense precisely because it should be looked at and for no other reason.



Right back at you Rhub. The problem with discussing serious subjects with people that think they are a helluva lot smarter than they actually are is illustrated with your sentence above.

Feel free to apologize anytime you are ready.
It's all just Greek to me.

PS: Now that I've pregressed to the A-hole distinction, do I at least get a prize?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hugh Januss said:
I believe I am beginning to see the light



















Red is right

Interesting.

You posted this;

Public schools are floundering not because teachers are lazy, stupid and evil,
as if this is a position I hold? Have I got that right? If you are attributing this to me then perhaps you can do me a favor and show the forum where I've stated this.

How much more money should we allocate for education? I mean, that's the only real problem, right?

BTW, WTF happened to your sense of humor?
 
Cobblestones said:
Rhubroma: I have to give Scott credit that his graph provided increases in absolute $ as well as %.

About voucher school programs:

You'll probably see some posts here with examples where the voucher program 'works'. And I agree with the data that when you put a few charter schools in bad school districts it 'works'. Why do these schools see good results? First, you get a self-selected group of parents who do give a damn about the education of their children. Second, there is an admission process which can be further selective.

Once you have a select group of students, result will always be better. If you take any public school and only count the results of the upper 50% of the students, of course it does look better.

The problems would come when you put every student in the same system and count them all.

Here's the main reason why US schools are lacking: poor school districts. Money for schools should be averaged out at least statewide, if not nationwide. Second problem: teachers need to be better prepared. Finland, the country with the best school system in the Western World requires their teachers to have a MSc degree in their field. A math teacher who cannot integrate and differentiate himself, cannot teach it to the students. And of course, in order to attract people with MSc degrees to childhood education, the salary has to be consummate.

The voucher program clouds this issue behind a smokescreen of 'free choice' which for a large part of the proponents means introduction of 'creation science' or abstinence eduction. A lot of them do NOT care about bettering the school system as long as religion is allowed to enter the curriculum.

I am scared when I compare school curricula across the world. Good math education does not require much more than a chalkboard and paper/pencil on the part of the student. Even a significant fraction of third world nations provides a more stringent math curriculum in their high schools than the US. Now, of course, high school is unattainable for a lot of their citizens, but that doesn't have to stay that way for long. Just as at one point, we required everybody to learn to read and write, we are at a point where we might have to require everybody to be able to do analysis and probability calculation. Just as illiteracy is unacceptable nowadays, so might be math illiteracy in the near future.
Caro, it all boils down to the fact that we don't have a humanistic tradition anymore. It's all just business as usual.

And, frankly, these ratings are so relative. How do we quantify a good education anyway? Or good teachers, and students? Because they all have a masters degree? Or because the classrooms are outfitted with the latest corporate gadgets?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
rhubroma said:
It's all just Greek to me.

PS: Now that I've pregressed to the A-hole distinction, do I at least get a prize?
Your fall-back position you've used before.

No prize for being an A-Hole, but does pregressed mean you were an A-Hole before anything else?
 
The Masters of the Universe in the private sector don't want a strong public school system, because it denies them the hegemony they seek over society.

Yet the very backbone of a solid democracy is a strong public school system that's egalitarian and hence accessible to all. I, therefore, detest selective admission in principle.

I have no problem with confronting a right wing prof so long as their isn't an issue with one from the left holding a chair. The youth need such exposure to mature, in complete liberty, to thus be able to decide upon which positions to embrace after they have been informed of all the possibilities.

In a private system, the financing decides what is acceptable and what isn't. One must toe the line and not rock the boat. The game is fixed. Apart from being not very democratic, it takes us back to a period in which wealth and power determine the world view and public dialogue. Teachers must be free to disseminate ideas and not be made into puppets of a system.

Economic neoliberalism is thus a masked feudalism and it is happening again before our very eyes. It is vapid ideology and nothing more.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
rhubroma said:
The Masters of the Universe in the private sector don't want a strong public school system, because it denies them the hegemony they seek over society.

Yet the very backbone of a solid democracy is a strong public school system that's egalitarian and hence accessible to all. I, therefore, detest selective admission in principle.

I have no problem with confronting a right wing prof so long as their isn't an issue with one from the left holding a chair. The youth need such exposure to mature, in complete liberty, to thus be able to decide upon which positions to embrace after they have been informed of all the possibilities.

In a private system, the financing decides what is acceptable and what isn't. One must toe the line and not rock the boat. The game is fixed. Apart from being not very democratic, it takes us back to a period in which wealth and power determine the world view and public dialogue. Teachers must be free to disseminate ideas and not be made into puppets of a system.

Economic neoliberalism is thus a masked feudalism and it is happening again before our very eyes. It is vapid ideology and nothing more.
The Masters of the Universe in the private sector don't want a strong public school system, because it denies them the hegemony they seek over society.
The Masters of the Universe in the public sector don't want a strong public school system because it threatens their position of dominance and control, for the easiest way to control a population is to deny an education.

Sounds stupid don't it?

You really are so invested in your world view that any opposition must be of evil intent. Did it ever occur to you that this kind of demagoguery is problematic at best and really just toxic?
 
May 23, 2010
2,409
0
0
Look! All that matters to scott and his kind is that there are minority children in public schools and as a white person scott doesn't feel they deserve an education at the expense of PRODUCERS like himself and other white people.

BOTTOM LINE END OF STORY
 
May 23, 2010
2,409
0
0
Adulterers beware???????

""Did you know that your iPhone keeps track of where you are?" That's all it takes. "Did you know your iPhone is keeping track of everywhere you go, and here's an application that will produce on a map everywhere you've been. Would you like your wife to get hold of that? Would you like your husband to get hold of that?" You put all that together with the fact that Algore sits on the Apple board, the fact that Apple is a bunch of libs associated with the regime and so forth, you start putting these things together, and it's not hard for people to think that there may be something nefarious going on. So, yeah, there were a lot of people who are a little concerned about this.""--Rush Limbaugh
 
Jul 9, 2009
6,625
0
0
rhubroma said:
The Masters of the Universe in the private sector don't want a strong public school system, because it denies them the hegemony they seek over society.
Scott SoCal said:
The Masters of the Universe in the public sector don't want a strong public school system because it threatens their position of dominance and control, for the easiest way to control a population is to deny an education.
Rhubarb, the Masters of the Universe just don't want to pay any taxes towards a strong public school system, simple as that.

Scott, I don't even have any idea what you are on about there.:rolleyes:
 
Jul 9, 2009
6,625
0
0
redtreviso said:
Adulterers beware???????

""Did you know that your iPhone keeps track of where you are?" That's all it takes. "Did you know your iPhone is keeping track of everywhere you go, and here's an application that will produce on a map everywhere you've been. Would you like your wife to get hold of that? Would you like your husband to get hold of that?" You put all that together with the fact that Algore sits on the Apple board, the fact that Apple is a bunch of libs associated with the regime and so forth, you start putting these things together, and it's not hard for people to think that there may be something nefarious going on. So, yeah, there were a lot of people who are a little concerned about this.""--Rush Limbaugh
What kind of woman (or man) would want to have an affair with Limburger?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
redtreviso said:
Look! All that matters to scott and his kind is that there are minority children in public schools and as a white person scott doesn't feel they deserve an education at the expense of PRODUCERS like himself and other white people.

BOTTOM LINE END OF STORY
See now you went and hurt my feelings when you call me a racist and a bigot.

Bottom line and end of story is you are getting your *** kicked in the debate and like all morally bankrupt cowards you go straight to the name calling.

I'd say it cheapens your argument but then you've never really had one.
 
May 23, 2010
2,409
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
See now you went and hurt my feelings when you call me a racist and a bigot.

Bottom line and end of story is you are getting your *** kicked in the debate and like all morally bankrupt cowards you go straight to the name calling.

I'd say it cheapens your argument but then you've never really had one.
No..Not getting kicked at all..all the details from you are just a ruse to try to legitimatize your true cause. This goes for most other things as well. Like going after teachers when it is really just your contempt of women that concerns you.(and your kind)
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
redtreviso said:
No..Not getting kicked at all..all the details from you are just a ruse to try to legitimatize your true cause. This goes for most other things as well. Like going after teachers when it is really just your contempt of women that concerns you.(and your kind)
You really do have reading comprehension challenges, or it's willfully lying. Either way I really don't care. I just crack up the way you play to your stereotype.

BTW, you forgot Homophobe. You really aren't very good at this.
 
May 23, 2010
2,409
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
You really do have reading comprehension challenges, or it's willfully lying. Either way I really don't care. I just crack up the way you play to your stereotype.
It is not a stereotype.. It is the anti intellectual base of the republican party for which no elections could be won without.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hugh Januss said:
Rhubarb, the Masters of the Universe just don't want to pay any taxes towards a strong public school system, simple as that.

Scott, I don't even have any idea what you are on about there.:rolleyes:
Yes, apparently it went right over your head. You see what Rhub wrote is patently absurd. So I thought, for illustrative purposes it would be fun to counter that with something similarly absurd from the other point of view.

The problem is you guys on the left really believe the absolute worst of the other side. The is no possible way any dissent from your way of thinking can be tolerated. You have all the answers so someone like me comes along with a different perspective and I can't be just wrong, I have to be evil.

You guys say the harshest stuff to those you disagree with. Then in the same breath you wonder out loud why there can be no civil discourse. It's pathetic but I am used to it.
 
Jul 9, 2009
6,625
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Yes, apparently it went right over your head. You see what Rhub wrote is patently absurd. So I thought, for illustrative purposes it would be fun to counter that with something similarly absurd from the other point of view.

The problem is you guys on the left really believe the absolute worst of the other side. The is no possible way any dissent from your way of thinking can be tolerated. You have all the answers so someone like me comes along with a different perspective and I can't be just wrong, I have to be evil.

You guys say the harshest stuff to those you disagree with. Then in the same breath you wonder out loud why there can be no civil discourse. It's pathetic but I am used to it.
I have never said you are evil, just wrong. Some of the people who's ideas you have been sucked in by are however evil.
 
May 23, 2010
2,409
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Yes, apparently it went right over your head. You see what Rhub wrote is patently absurd. So I thought, for illustrative purposes it would be fun to counter that with something similarly absurd from the other point of view.

The problem is you guys on the left really believe the absolute worst of the other side. The is no possible way any dissent from your way of thinking can be tolerated. You have all the answers so someone like me comes along with a different perspective and I can't be just wrong, I have to be evil.

You guys say the harshest stuff to those you disagree with. Then in the same breath you wonder out loud why there can be no civil discourse. It's pathetic but I am used to it.
Right...there are just tons of Liberal Ann Coulters and Limbaughs out there on their own ultra friendly 24/7 propaganda networks..
You're so FOS scott
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,307
1
0
redtreviso said:
Right...there are just tons of Liberal Ann Coulters and Limbaughs out there on their own ultra friendly 24/7 propaganda networks..
You're so FOS scott
Now is the time to work FoxNews back into the discussion.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S Off Topic DIscussions 12
Similar threads
2019 Rugby World Cup

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS