Education in this country

tonyb

jcandy wrote: »

Americans are ethically good and are for entitlements that provide the basic necessitiesMy opinion is that one should be free to spend or invest one's disposable income according to one's preferences. The essential aspect of this issue that is perhaps not fully appreciated is that since about 1970, most of your money (the wealth produced by American workers) has been cleverly scooped-up by the elite (since the elite did not create the wealth, they are "stealing it" according to Capitalist rhetoric, which I agree with in this instance):

Well of coarse people want entitlements, getting something for nothing is appealing to anyone. If you agree that one should be free to spend his /her own disposable income as they see fit, then how can it not be confrontational when you keep having to give up that disposable income a piece at a time,year after year.
Define "elite"....a word thrown around alot but never defined. Are they the rich in general ? Lawmakers ? Corporations ? Who are they exactly and at what income level determines if your elite ?
In my view, it's not so much the money one person has but the power over others. Such as unions who have the power to force you to pay them without a choice, government that can take your disposable income at will for whatever reason they deem necessary. Taxes are necessary, don't get me wrong, within reason. Whats reasonable then becomes subjective to many. I like to break it down to simpler principles. Like limited entitlements, not spending more than you take in, letting the average citizen keep as much of his own money as possible, because then he has choice. You start taking away choice then you start chipping away at ones freedom.
The public sector views education as an entitlement. Government agency's tell you what your entitled to in the way of education and unions tell you how much you'll have to pay. Where's the choice ? As a teacher, in some states,you have to join a union,have to pay dues, no choice. As a public worker,same thing. If you had a voucher system, you'd have more choice, but those in control of the money would have less power. As a taxpayer, you have to pay for services you don't receive,no choice. Having choice puts the power back in the individuals hands, which is why in so many ways your choices are limited if not eliminated in some cases. You can blame whoever for the inequality that exists between classes, but that will always exist. Everyone is not born a rocket scientist. But everyone is born with the ability to make choices, and those who make good choices should not be forced into wealth sharing for those who make bad choices.

tonyb

Any of you guys from Connecticut ? Just saw a story,want to see if you can verify. The labor relations board in your state ruled a certain town,the whole town, must provide coffee and milk,free,to union workers. This in retaliation for the town protesting against unions. Ontop of the taxpayer having to pick up 10 g's in legal fee's for the unions. Talk about over stepping....geez. How can you order someone to give away any of what you own for free ? Now thats f$%ked up right there.

nooshinjohn

Found it...

Connecticut Town Ordered to Pay for Union Workers’ Coffee
By Todd Starnes

Published March 04, 2011
A Connecticut town must provide their union workers free coffee and milk, according to a ruling from the State Board of Labor Relations.

The board also ordered town leaders to reinstate “Dress Down Fridays” for the union clerical and custodial workers.

The dispute involved the town of Orange and the local chapter of the United Public Service Employees Union.

The board determined the town retaliated against the union members for comments they made at a finance meeting in 2009.

The day after that meeting, First Selectman James Zeloi eliminated the free coffee and milk and the following day ended “Dress Down Friday.” Zeoli told The New Haven Register that he pulled the plug on the coffee to save money and stopped casual Fridays because some employees were abusing the privilege.

“It shows you how crazy state government has become,” Connecticut Republican Party Chairman Chris Healy told Fox News Radio. “You’d almost laugh at it, if it wasn’t so serious in tone.

This is just another black eye on state government.”

Healy said he was especially troubled that not only will taxpayers be forced to purchase coffee and milk for the union workers, but they will also be required to pay $10,000 in legal bills.

“It says the state labor relations board is in the pocket of labor,” Healy said.

Wayne Gilbert, the regional director of the union, told Fox News Radio this was a case about an elected official who intimidated workers because they exercised their First Amendment rights by speaking out at the finance meeting.

“This is not about free coffee,” Gilbert said. “The complaint was filed because First Selectman Zeloi is a workplace bully.”

“He bullies the workers around, he bullies the union officials around and if you disagree with him in a very civil way, he starts yelling and screaming and calling you names,” he said.

Healy said nothing prevents workers in the town of Orange from taking coffee breaks or drinking coffee – but he wonders why they don't purchase their own coffee.

Gilbert said they filed the complaint to protect the workers – and he accused Republicans of misrepresenting the grievance.

“It’s like a couple of bucks a week,” he said about the coffee.

“We’ve got oil depletion allowances out there for these major oil companies to the tune of billions of dollars and we’re talking about a couple of dollars for coffee?”

“My members can afford their own coffee,” Gilbert added.

But Healy said if that’s the case, why are they footing the coffee bill?

jcandy

tonyb wrote: »

Well of coarse people want entitlements, getting something for nothing is appealing to anyone.

I guess we operate in different circles. What grown adult is actually under the impression that they are getting "something for nothing"? In the case of education, you pay the state (something) to educate your child (something). So, you get something for something. In Finland and Sweden, for example, the state educates children very efficiently and very effectively. Have a look at this website:

http://www.hel.fi/hki/Opev/en/Etusivu

To me, that looks like a sort of ideal scenario. Have you ever met and spoken with (in English) a product of the Swedish or Finnish education system? I was a visiting professor in Sweden for 2 months in 2008, and I can tell you first-hand that these countries get a whole lot of something for their something.

tonyb wrote: »

If you agree that one should be free to spend his /her own disposable income as they see fit, then how can it not be confrontational when you keep having to give up that disposable income a piece at a time,year after year.

Of course people should become confrontational when they are forced to surrender a significant amount of disposable income to finance a multi-trillion-dollar bailout which benefits the top 1% of wage earners (traders, hedge-fund managers, etc). However, in Canada, for example, where I was educated, I don't ever remember my parents complaining about the roughly 5% hit to gross income that was required to put three kids through college.

tonyb wrote: »

Define "elite"

Top 0.1% to 1.0%, depending on context.

tonyb wrote: »

Are they the rich in general ? Lawmakers ? Corporations ? Who are they exactly and at what income level determines if your elite ?

Let me repeat myself: Top 0.1% to 1.0%.

tonyb wrote: »

In my view, it's not so much the money one person has but the power over others. Such as unions who have the power to force you to pay them without a choice,

And corporation have the power to not pay you what you deserve -- that is, on average, employees produce more wealth than reflected by their salary. In some case, much more. Unions in the USA have been demonized for reasons which become clear if you do your homework. Still, if unions are an intrinsic evil, why is the standard of living notably better in Canada -- a place where 30% of all workers belong to unions? I think in economics it is well-recognized that like a company, a union can be "good" or "bad".

tonyb wrote: »

Like limited entitlements, not spending more than you take in, letting the average citizen keep as much of his own money as possible, because then he has choice. You start taking away choice then you start chipping away at ones freedom.

I only see this as more conservative rhetoric. The American "our freedom blah blah blah" mantra is hard to take seriously when you are not American. In the USA, you had slavery until recently, you can't be elected to public office if you are an atheist, and native speakers on average can barely write a sentence of prose without making an error that would make my non-native-speaker wife laugh.

steveinaz

If I were running this country, social security would be hands-off money (not discreationary funding), and at the age of 21, any American could opt out of SS, collect what they have paid in, and invest as they see fit. Management of the money (rather lack thereof) is 85% of the reason SS is failing.

stubby

steveinaz wrote: »

If I were running this country, social security would be hands-off money (not discreationary funding), and at the age of 21, any American could opt out of SS, collect what they have paid in, and invest as they see fit. Management of the money (rather lack thereof) is 85% of the reason SS is failing.

Sounds great, you have my vote.

BTW, would I be able to opt "back in" after I was much older and finally figured out I was a poor investor?

jcandy

stubby wrote: »

BTW, would I be able to opt "back in" after I was much older and finally figured out I was a poor investor?

If Wall Street can why can't you?

BlueFox

tonyb wrote: »

Well of coarse people want entitlements,..

jcandy wrote: »

I guess we operate in different circles. What grown adult is actually under the impression that they are getting "something for nothing"?

You misunderstood him. He is talking about "coarse" people. That is, those who are uncouth and uncivilized. Of course they want something for nothing. :rolleyes:

tonyb

Jcandy- I think we are on two different pages my man. Take a trip to L.A., and you'll see entitlement heaven.
I don't mean to insinuate all unions are bad, some are very good, just so happens the public sector ones, most of them, fall on the bad side.
Have to disagree with your comments on Canada. I have lots of friends from their who would also disagree. From taxes to healthcare, they hit the road for the USA. One of my friends is a Executive for Bosch tools. He grew up in Canada, lived their until he was in his 30's. He also lived in the U.K, South America...Brazil to be exact, and had some shorter stints in the mid east. His opinion,as a foreigner from Canada is that the USA is number one for quality of life. Now, I'm sure some find it up there peachy, that's cool too. One should like where they live.
Don't know what to say about your conservative mantra comments, don't know exactly what road your going down on that.
Sure, a corporation can not pay you what you deserve, True, but then you have a choice to not work for them, yes ? If enough workers decided a particular company was crap, they would have a hard time finding workers, or good ones anyway.
So the elite,in your view is the very top. Recent events in the financial world had the very top hording their money. Some even lost a bundle, won't shed a tear for them either. But what happened to the jobs when the rich couldn't make money ? They disappeared, unemployment shot up. Has a poor person ever given you a job? Your Robin Hood mentality is misplaced. The European system of welfare is unsustainable, as so seen by riots and austerity measures that they must now partake in. Problem is once you give them something,it's hard to take it away. Sooner or later,you run out of other peoples money. Same with our public sector unions. If you practiced what you preached, you'd run out and find an able bodied homeless dude and fork over 30% of your income. To him, you are the top tier, the elite.

jcandy

tonyb wrote: »

The European system of welfare is unsustainable

First of all, Europe is home to many different welfare/health care systems, some of which are efficient (Scandinavia) and some of which are not (France). The demise of even the best systems may in fact be inevitable, but its likely not for the reason you might think. Given the events of the last three years, it appears that the global US-UK-EU economy may be unsustainable -- not because of pensions and health care, but because of its structural fragility. And the US economy and standard of living are apparently the least sustainable of all:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAfNbhwxyEA&feature=related

So, you might want to start working on your German. My wife speaks four languages fluently, so we are in good shape.

jcandy

Welfare (Chomsky, eighth most cited author of all time):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7JXfwUtz0w

Tax cuts (Stiglitz, Nobel Prize winner):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOKSekS5ZZk

Market fundamentalism (Stiglitz again):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_2-Tv2GPs0

Income inequality and unions (Krugman, Nobel Prize winner)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kwA-CwFK5A

nooshinjohn

...I just briefly watched snippets of the video links provided above... taken in as much as I could stand actually, as they all come from a decidedly anachist/communist slant. Heres one that truly makes sense. This is not a political statement, rather an accurate rebuttal to the videos above, and a sumation of my beliefs. Watch it if you like, or not.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06vP84SqnS4

mdaudioguy

Reported ddjond2

jcandy

nooshinjohn wrote: »

taken in as much as I could stand actually,[/url]

That doesn't surprise me at all, but the truth sometimes hurts. Since the bailout, so much of this has become utterly transparent.

steveinaz

I hate to be captain obvious here, but taking advice on how the country should be run from a Californian, is like taking investment advice from Bernie Madoff. Just sayin. Your state is buried in so much debt, due to your "handout" mentality, it's hardly in a position to lecture any other state. BTW, the Arizona boycott by Kali over SB1070 was devasting to our economy----NOT; but it certainly ended me spending any money in California, or California based businesses on the web. Now, if we could just stop the migration of Californians to Arizona, (and bringing their politics with them) we'd be in good shape--I guess we're not hated that much. I sense "conviction" is not a strong trait in Cali.

nooshinjohn

jcandy wrote: »

That doesn't surprise me at all, but the truth sometimes hurts. Since the bailout, so much of this has become utterly transparent.

The truth is that your position has been tried countless times throughout history and it has utterly failed every time it has been tried. Further, it has led to some of the most horrific regimes that have ever populated the earth. Forgive me if I choose a representative REPUBLIC over what it is that you are trying to sell. I choose to stand with the Constitution, and our founding principles.

Pycroft

To John and JCandy...this is getting a bit out of hand I think. John, comparing a liberal view to one of a communist and anarchist is a bit out of line. I think we've towed the line on both sides between education and politics, and now it's swinging more to politics which was not the original idea I believe. Of course, they are related in many ways, but I haven't seen an educational post in a while. When it boils down to it, there are many ways to change/fix/alter things and everyone does it differently, and of course everyone has opinions on who does it right and who does it wrong. Truth is, things are broken and in need of fixing, but to me, suggesting that a more liberal point of view is communistic, Un-American, etc. is just silly partisian stuff. I think this discussion has been great thus far, but maybe it's time to close the thread?

kevhed72

Close the thread....close the thread!

steveinaz

...and I was so well behaved for so many pages...sorry, but excuses instead of solutions drive me nuts.

jcandy

You've got my vote. OTOH, I think the main point of all this in relation to education was that state-run education is a very natural, obvious thing to do, and certainly not an intrinsic evil by any measure. However, in my opinion, state-run education fails when parents fail. I believe the inverse correlation between poverty and performance is so perfect that it should make you cry.

My own daughter attends private school, because, to put it succinctly, the *kids* at the public elementary school in my district scare the crap out of me. At my daughter's school, the kids are exceptionally polite and fun-loving. Fighting and serious conflicts, cliques, are unheard of. These behaviours are reflections of guidance given first by parents, second by teachers.

nooshinjohn

steveinaz wrote: »

...and I was so well behaved for so many pages...sorry, but excuses instead of solutions drive me nuts.

Me as well. What drives me insane is hearing those that broke the system, or those that benefit from the status-quo espouse the belief that they alone know how to "fix" it by throwing yet more money at the problem. Their solution has never worked, and never will work. Those that have ideas that would truly work must be discredited at all cost.

The definition of insanity is doing the same things over and over again, with the expectation that somehow the result will be different. I am tired of the inmates running the asylum.

jcandy

steveinaz wrote: »

I hate to be captain obvious here, but taking advice on how the country should be run from a Californian, is like taking investment advice from Bernie Madoff. Just sayin. Your state is buried in so much debt, due to your "handout" mentality, it's hardly in a position to lecture any other state. BTW, the Arizona boycott by Kali over SB1070 was devasting to our economy----NOT; but it certainly ended me spending any money in California, or California based businesses on the web. Now, if we could just stop the migration of Californians to Arizona, (and bringing their politics with them) we'd be in good shape--I guess we're not hated that much. I sense "conviction" is not a strong trait in Cali.

I think humans have a need to understand reality which greatly exceeds their capacity to actually understand reality. Why bother researching and discussing details when chanting one-liners makes you feel so good?

steveinaz

Because your rhetoric was becoming more than I could bear. As John pointed out, (to paraphrase) how many times do you have to beat your head against the wall until you realize your solutions----AREN'T. They are tired old re-hashes of the same old thing.

Now, if you've got some new solutions, suggestions, opinions on how to IMPROVE the system, I am all ears...

jcandy

steveinaz wrote: »

Because your rhetoric was becoming more than I could bear. As John pointed out, (to paraphrase) how many times do you have to beat your head against the wall unitl you realize your solutions----AREN'T. They are tired old re-hashes of the same old thing.

You are attacking your own strawman; and you're attacking it with one-liners. The essential message, given by the world's leading economic theorists, in all the 4 videos was primarily to analyze the current economic situation, not to propose solutions.

You do know that there was a huge financial collapse, right?

You know that the ultra-rich CEOs and hedge-fund managers themselves lost nothing in the process of generating trillions in losses, right?

You know that the scale of these losses was many times greater than the total of all middle-class entitlements you incorrectly think are the problem, right?

You know the trillions in losses have been transferred to taxpayers, right, amounting to what is effectively a negative entitlement, right?

10 years ago, I could understand some level of denial regarding corporate welfare. But now its 100% transparent. Wake up.

steveinaz

Again, lots of statistics, lots of gloom & doom---no solutions...wake yourself up.

jcandy

steveinaz wrote: »

Now, if you've got some new solutions, suggestions, opinions on how to IMPROVE the system, I am all ears...

(1) Make Wall Street responsible for their losses (i.e., force them to be real capitalists)
(2) Insulate the taxpayers from these losses
(3) Reduce fragility in financial institutions

Related to 1 and 2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lomfyIE60I8

Related to 2 and 3:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcjFJUMmA40&feature=relmfu

Education and social security and minor issues, economically, compared to this.

nooshinjohn

jcandy wrote: »

I think humans have a need to understand reality which greatly exceeds their capacity to actually understand reality. Why bother researching and discussing details when chanting one-liners makes you feel so good?

:mad::mad:This is flat out insulting... Why is it that human intelligence needs to be dumbed down? Is it so the "enlightened few" such as yourself can help us feeble minded humans get through the day without hurting ourselves?:mad::mad:

I understand that human-kind(and specifically the free people of the US) have the ability to do things like put man on the moon, cure disease and win what was previously impossible.(three front war in WWII) The spirit of a free man knows no limits and all is possible. Understanding a simple thing like the troubles in the education system and working towards solutions is simple compared to the rest, so I suggest you refrain from insinuating that poeple are to stupid to understand it.

jcandy

nooshinjohn wrote: »

:mad::mad:This is flat out insulting... Why is it that human intelligence needs to be dumbed down? Is it so the "enlightened few" such as yourself can help us feeble minded humans get through the day without hurting ourselves?:mad::mad:

I wouldn't use the expression feeble-minded; under-educated is more appropriate. People in this country are also very vocal and convinced about various facts of the matter in evolution and climate change. What tends to unify denialists in both cases is the lack of education, whereas the people with Ph.Ds tend to see eye-to-eye.

Actually, if the financial crisis was good for anything, it was for its great illustrative power with respect to corporate welfare. 5 years ago, it was very hard to make any progress on the topic. Trillions of dollars in corporate welfare later, its a bit easier.

steveinaz

It doesn't take a PhD to figure out what's wrong with this country; liability, handouts, big Government, and total lack of personal responsibility. Fix the first 3 and number 4, as well as everything else falls into place.

cnh

I think if you add a phrase to ...liability, handouts, big Gov't, and a total lack of personal [and 'corporate' and business] responsibility, that both you and jcandy could find a point of common ground for a discussion?

cnh