Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
OT Foodstamps
115 views
Skip to first unread message
nothermark
Jul 26, 2012, 10:49:18 AM7/26/12
to
Listening to Diane Rehm show talk about Foodstamps. The two states
with the most consumption are Mississippi and Oregon. Mississippi has
the most poor folks and Oregon has the most efficient get your
benefits program. Interesting show for anybody that wants to find the
on line archive.
with the most consumption are Mississippi and Oregon. Mississippi has
the most poor folks and Oregon has the most efficient get your
benefits program. Interesting show for anybody that wants to find the
on line archive.
LonVanOstran
Jul 26, 2012, 5:51:47 PM7/26/12
to
20.7% of 3 million people. Mississippi.
20.1% of less than 4 million people. Oregon
19.7% of 10 million people. Michigan.
Mississippi and Oregon aren't even within smelling distance, let alone
on top.
I'm sure a more complete search would reveal that California and New
York are MILES ahead of either of those states, based upon population
alone. In fact, I would bet that New York city alone, with a population
of over 8 million people, tops either one, as well as topping Michigan
for total # on food stamps.
Lon
nothermark
Jul 26, 2012, 6:27:01 PM7/26/12
to
only run something like 20-30% of eligible people on the program. That
was part of the program, talking about how some states encourage use
and some do not.
If you litened to the show or read the transcript you might find out I
am wrong. I doubt it but you might. ;-)
LonVanOstran
Jul 26, 2012, 8:19:02 PM7/26/12
to
say that what you heard was wrong. Big difference. I really couldn't
care any less what the show transcripts say. I looked up the data and
disproved the nonsense.
Lon
Bruce S
Jul 26, 2012, 9:12:22 PM7/26/12
to
right in what they said, but that mark has reported it incorrectly,
making him wrong - as usual.
--
Bruce
"The free market punishes irresponsibility. Government rewards it." �
Harry Browne
In other shocking news, if it wasn't bad enough that the poorest 20%
comprise a fifth of all citizens, they're ALSO in the bottom quintile!
LonVanOstran
Jul 26, 2012, 9:18:40 PM7/26/12
to
Lon
Owen McKenzie
Jul 26, 2012, 10:20:23 PM7/26/12
to
post to highest percentage it would be consistent with the numbers he
posted and would make more sense.
--
Owen McKenzie
Posting from Pigeon Forge, TN
We were promised hope and change.
We got hype and blame.
Bruce S
Jul 26, 2012, 10:24:21 PM7/26/12
to
Frank Howell
Jul 26, 2012, 10:26:05 PM7/26/12
to
think the Oregon Dept. of Human Services even went into the bushes as
dragged out wino's and alkies to sign up. Ever wonder why food stamps are
growing?
--
Frank Howell
LonVanOstran
Jul 26, 2012, 10:26:35 PM7/26/12
to
assessment. But it was Mark.
Lon
nothermark
Jul 27, 2012, 7:54:01 AM7/27/12
to
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 18:12:22 -0700, Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Partly correct. It was fraction of the state as opposed to raw
numbers. May still make it as raw numbers. I do not know.
MS. DIANE REHM 10:07:21
Joining me in the studio to talk about the politics and economics of
feeding the nation's poor: Jim Weill of the Food Research and Action
Center, Jerry Hagstrom of The Hagstrom Report and National Journal
magazine, and Douglas Besharov of the University of Maryland and the
Atlantic Council. I hope you'll join us, 800-433-8850. Send us your
email to drs...@wamu.org. Join us on Facebook or send us a tweet. Good
morning to all of you.
Rehm 10:44:10
And why is it that Mississippi and Oregon have the highest percentage
of their populations on food stamps?
HAGSTROM 10:44:21
Well, Jim might be able to address this also, but I would say that in
Mississippi, there is a great deal of poverty and has been, you know,
over the centuries. In Oregon, it's a higher income state, but they've
had economic problems. And I believe Oregon has one of the best
programs in the country to encourage people to take advantage of their
food stamp benefit.
WEILL 10:44:45
That's right. Jerry's right. Oregon reaches a higher proportion of
eligible people than even Mississippi does. The percentage of eligible
people that states reach varies widely, and it also goes to this
argument that states are just taking advantage of the program. In some
states like California, only half of the eligible people are in the
program 'cause the states put up barriers to getting on the program.
In California, until a year ago, if you move from one county to
another, you had to reapply for food stamps, so..
wrote:
numbers. May still make it as raw numbers. I do not know.
MS. DIANE REHM 10:07:21
Joining me in the studio to talk about the politics and economics of
feeding the nation's poor: Jim Weill of the Food Research and Action
Center, Jerry Hagstrom of The Hagstrom Report and National Journal
magazine, and Douglas Besharov of the University of Maryland and the
Atlantic Council. I hope you'll join us, 800-433-8850. Send us your
email to drs...@wamu.org. Join us on Facebook or send us a tweet. Good
morning to all of you.
Rehm 10:44:10
And why is it that Mississippi and Oregon have the highest percentage
of their populations on food stamps?
HAGSTROM 10:44:21
Well, Jim might be able to address this also, but I would say that in
Mississippi, there is a great deal of poverty and has been, you know,
over the centuries. In Oregon, it's a higher income state, but they've
had economic problems. And I believe Oregon has one of the best
programs in the country to encourage people to take advantage of their
food stamp benefit.
WEILL 10:44:45
That's right. Jerry's right. Oregon reaches a higher proportion of
eligible people than even Mississippi does. The percentage of eligible
people that states reach varies widely, and it also goes to this
argument that states are just taking advantage of the program. In some
states like California, only half of the eligible people are in the
program 'cause the states put up barriers to getting on the program.
In California, until a year ago, if you move from one county to
another, you had to reapply for food stamps, so..
nothermark
Jul 27, 2012, 7:57:01 AM7/27/12
to
see why.
jerryosage
Jul 27, 2012, 8:32:07 AM7/27/12
to
and lazier and we have to support them.
Positive feedback never works as a control mechanism. However, it can
be fun to watch for a little while until whatever is trying to be
controlled self destructs.
nothermark
Jul 27, 2012, 9:09:01 AM7/27/12
to
around whining about the workers when the problem is systemic at all
levels. Do not get me started on the failings of edubusiness to
prepare folks adequately.
jerryosage
Jul 27, 2012, 9:38:39 AM7/27/12
to
there. You live in Rochester. Look at Eastman Kodak - stupid, inept
management at all levels killed that company. (The Peter Principle at
work - never promote someone smarter and more driven than you - make
them leave the company, or, at least keep them out of management).
However the smart workers abandoned that ship as soon as it started
taking on water. The average workers didn't leave until it started
listing and the stupid rode it to the bottom. Such is life.
I believe it was John Wayne who stated: "Life is hard and it is a lot
harder if you are stupid."
>Do not get me started on the failings of edubusiness to
>prepare folks adequately.
Jerry O.
LonVanOstran
Jul 27, 2012, 10:24:17 AM7/27/12
to
read the report he was discussing?
Lon
Frank Howell
Jul 27, 2012, 11:09:33 AM7/27/12
to
are the result of legislation created in congress to reward people who spend
to much of their wealth on booze, smartphones, big screen tv's and fast food
etc and then as a reward to those politicians keep voting them in to support
more wealth transfer programs.
But you must be for food stamps, even though you don't qualify for them due
to your wealth, as this satisfies your well known philosphy for economic
equality. You go Man! Praise the poor!
Maybe the next equality stamps might be cars and homes, eternal unemployment
benefits, etc.?
--
Frank Howell
Mike Hendrix at dot
Jul 27, 2012, 12:21:54 PM7/27/12
to
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 08:09:33 -0700, "Frank Howell"
-----------------------
Frank, thanks. I could not have said that better myself. It bears
repeating.
mike
--
Pensacola, FL
http://www.travellogs.us/
Frank, thanks. I could not have said that better myself. It bears
repeating.
mike
--
Pensacola, FL
http://www.travellogs.us/
nothermark
Jul 27, 2012, 12:34:04 PM7/27/12
to
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 10:24:17 -0400, LonVanOstran
I would think it would behoove one to read what was under discussion.
YMMV.
YMMV.
nothermark
Jul 27, 2012, 12:40:02 PM7/27/12
to
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 08:09:33 -0700, "Frank Howell"
If you took your hard out of somewhere and looked the folks who use
food stamps cannot afford booze, smartphones, big screen tv's and fast
food etc unless we give it to them. The only way they get them is if
we give it to them. That is a different topic.
food stamps cannot afford booze, smartphones, big screen tv's and fast
food etc unless we give it to them. The only way they get them is if
we give it to them. That is a different topic.
Bruce S
Jul 27, 2012, 12:51:02 PM7/27/12
to
On 7/27/2012 4:54 AM, nothermark wrote:
>> >Well, the other (much more likely) possibility is that the show was
>> >right in what they said, but that mark has reported it incorrectly,
>> >making him wrong - as usual.
>
> Partly correct. It was fraction of the state as opposed to raw
> numbers. May still make it as raw numbers. I do not know.
No, absolutely correct. As usual, you misunderstood what was said, and
>> >Well, the other (much more likely) possibility is that the show was
>> >right in what they said, but that mark has reported it incorrectly,
>> >making him wrong - as usual.
>
> Partly correct. It was fraction of the state as opposed to raw
> numbers. May still make it as raw numbers. I do not know.
reported it incorrectly.
LonVanOstran
Jul 27, 2012, 5:52:05 PM7/27/12
to
nothermark wrote:
> If you took your hard out of somewhere and looked the folks who use
> food stamps cannot afford booze, smartphones, big screen tv's and fast
> food etc unless we give it to them. The only way they get them is if
> we give it to them. That is a different topic.
You've never posted anything that better demonstrates your complete
> If you took your hard out of somewhere and looked the folks who use
> food stamps cannot afford booze, smartphones, big screen tv's and fast
> food etc unless we give it to them. The only way they get them is if
> we give it to them. That is a different topic.
disconnect with reality.
Lon
LonVanOstran
Jul 27, 2012, 5:55:25 PM7/27/12
to
dill-weed's misinterpretation of the report.
I couldn't care any less whether it was the hosts mistake or yours.
Either way, you ended up getting it wrong........as usual.
Lon
Lone Haranguer
Jul 27, 2012, 6:03:37 PM7/27/12
to
Jerry Osage wrote:
> On 27 Jul 2012 06:57:01 -0500, nothermark <nothe...@not.here> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 19:26:05 -0700, "Frank Howell"
>> <fpho...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> nothermark wrote:
>>>> Listening to Diane Rehm show talk about Foodstamps. The two states
>>>> with the most consumption are Mississippi and Oregon. Mississippi has
>>>> the most poor folks and Oregon has the most efficient get your
>>>> benefits program. Interesting show for anybody that wants to find the
>>>> on line archive.
>>> Oregon got a 5 million dollar reward for signing up folks for food stamps. I
>>> think the Oregon Dept. of Human Services even went into the bushes as
>>> dragged out wino's and alkies to sign up. Ever wonder why food stamps are
>>> growing?
>> If you look at the wealth distribution curves over time it's easy to
>> see why. nd
> On 27 Jul 2012 06:57:01 -0500, nothermark <nothe...@not.here> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 19:26:05 -0700, "Frank Howell"
>> <fpho...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> nothermark wrote:
>>>> Listening to Diane Rehm show talk about Foodstamps. The two states
>>>> with the most consumption are Mississippi and Oregon. Mississippi has
>>>> the most poor folks and Oregon has the most efficient get your
>>>> benefits program. Interesting show for anybody that wants to find the
>>>> on line archive.
>>> Oregon got a 5 million dollar reward for signing up folks for food stamps. I
>>> think the Oregon Dept. of Human Services even went into the bushes as
>>> dragged out wino's and alkies to sign up. Ever wonder why food stamps are
>>> growing?
>> If you look at the wealth distribution curves over time it's easy to
In order to have a straight line for wealth distribution, ALL
would have to put in an equal number of work hours, be equally
motivated and be equally intelligent.
Since that is never the case, there will ALWAYS be a wealth
distribution curve.
It's not an accident that some people end up poor and others wealthy.
LZ
Lone Haranguer
Jul 27, 2012, 6:08:10 PM7/27/12
to
Did every graduate end up with the same wealth and status?
If even one became a millionaire, then it wasn't the education
that failed but individual failings.
LZ
nothermark
Jul 27, 2012, 6:24:01 PM7/27/12
to
I bumped into them more often that I was happy about. When I was
making sub $30,000 wages the last couple of years I had co workers
that had to depend on living on that income level. How much
intereaction do you have?
nothermark
Jul 27, 2012, 6:30:02 PM7/27/12
to
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:55:25 -0400, LonVanOstran
So I post a topic, what I heard on Diane Rehm, and you say the topic
is the report. I say it was the show.
I agree I missed that it was the fraction of folks instead of the
total number. I was busy trying to type the note. I also noted it
when it became an issue. So I am wrong for one of the few times and
owned up to it.
You were not even on the same page. The only reason I am "always
wrong" is that you are always on a different topic.
is the report. I say it was the show.
I agree I missed that it was the fraction of folks instead of the
total number. I was busy trying to type the note. I also noted it
when it became an issue. So I am wrong for one of the few times and
owned up to it.
You were not even on the same page. The only reason I am "always
wrong" is that you are always on a different topic.
nothermark
Jul 27, 2012, 6:37:01 PM7/27/12
to
The issue is not even close to how you describe it. The practice of
outsourcing to countries that pay lless than $200/mo for skilled
workers negates most of your preconceptions. It also has adversely
affected most of the private sector jobs in manyfacturinig and
service. That is a major reason why we have gone from something like
14% poor folks to 38%. Most of those folks work and work hard. Their
problem is they are locked at $10-12/hr maximum. Don't like it
somebody else will do it. There is an excess of workers because of
the job shortage created by outsourcing. You save at the store and
then pay the tax man for their welfare.
nothermark
Jul 27, 2012, 6:38:02 PM7/27/12
to
prepared and it is his fault?
nothermark
Jul 27, 2012, 7:04:01 PM7/27/12
to
tilted above average in management. I expect the biggest obstacle is
that most of them have an MBA. Think NIH.
I think you grossly misjudge what happened at Kodak or Xerox or a host
of other companies. I quite agree that upper management screwed up.
Once you get below that level it gets a lot more complex.
Both companies developed a lot of technology from the ground up. Once
the patents ran out most of their research was free to anybody else
that wanted it. In Kodaks case that also involved the original
digital development. I saw digital backs on Nikon cameras as a
product in around 1985. It was not a new product.
Workers at both companies followed similar paths. As the business
contracted due to cheap foreign competition the entrepreneurial side
more or less followed your model. OTOH the technical specialists
often had no job options in this country. All they could/can do is
hang on and pray. Plan b is literally "would you like fries with
that?". This is especially true if they are a couple who both have
decent jobs.
>
>However the smart workers abandoned that ship as soon as it started
>taking on water. The average workers didn't leave until it started
>listing and the stupid rode it to the bottom. Such is life.
>
>I believe it was John Wayne who stated: "Life is hard and it is a lot
>harder if you are stupid."
>
>>Do not get me started on the failings of edubusiness to
>>prepare folks adequately.
>
>I won't, you've already beat that dead horse to a pulp several times.
>
>Jerry O.
with the sharks.
Bruce S
Jul 27, 2012, 8:11:43 PM7/27/12
to
one of those years education mas made available to him. If he failed to
take advantage of that, and become educated, the only one to blame is him.
--
Bruce
"The free market punishes irresponsibility. Government rewards it." –
LonVanOstran
Jul 27, 2012, 8:19:38 PM7/27/12
to
nothermark wrote:
> I agree I missed that it was the fraction of folks instead of the
> total number.
Well damn Sam!!!!! Why didn't you just say so, instead of hiding it in
> I agree I missed that it was the fraction of folks instead of the
> total number.
so much bullshit? LOL
Lon
LonVanOstran
Jul 27, 2012, 8:30:45 PM7/27/12
to
nothermark wrote:
> The point is that while a spread is expected it is also expected to be
> tilted above average in management. I expect the biggest obstacle is
> that most of them have an MBA. Think NIH.
>
> I think you grossly misjudge what happened at Kodak or Xerox or a host
> of other companies. I quite agree that upper management screwed up.
> Once you get below that level it gets a lot more complex.
>
> Both companies developed a lot of technology from the ground up. Once
> the patents ran out most of their research was free to anybody else
> that wanted it. In Kodaks case that also involved the original
> digital development. I saw digital backs on Nikon cameras as a
> product in around 1985. It was not a new product.
>
> Workers at both companies followed similar paths. As the business
> contracted due to cheap foreign competition the entrepreneurial side
> more or less followed your model. OTOH the technical specialists
> often had no job options in this country. All they could/can do is
> hang on and pray. Plan b is literally "would you like fries with
> that?". This is especially true if they are a couple who both have
> decent jobs.
>
I've never seen anyone misunderestimate the abilities of the American
> The point is that while a spread is expected it is also expected to be
> tilted above average in management. I expect the biggest obstacle is
> that most of them have an MBA. Think NIH.
>
> I think you grossly misjudge what happened at Kodak or Xerox or a host
> of other companies. I quite agree that upper management screwed up.
> Once you get below that level it gets a lot more complex.
>
> Both companies developed a lot of technology from the ground up. Once
> the patents ran out most of their research was free to anybody else
> that wanted it. In Kodaks case that also involved the original
> digital development. I saw digital backs on Nikon cameras as a
> product in around 1985. It was not a new product.
>
> Workers at both companies followed similar paths. As the business
> contracted due to cheap foreign competition the entrepreneurial side
> more or less followed your model. OTOH the technical specialists
> often had no job options in this country. All they could/can do is
> hang on and pray. Plan b is literally "would you like fries with
> that?". This is especially true if they are a couple who both have
> decent jobs.
>
worker worse than nothermark does in nearly every one of his posts. If
we were to get government the hell out of the way, this economy would
rebound to newer and greater heights than we've ever known before. It's
truly sad that so many people destroy the American dream in misguided
attempts to help people who would be better off without help.
People like nothermark will never grasp the fact that it is his own
efforts which do the most harm to the people.
Lon
LonVanOstran
Jul 27, 2012, 9:06:40 PM7/27/12
to
nothermark wrote:
> I know poor folks and spent the last 7 years servicing computers where
> I bumped into them more often that I was happy about. When I was
> making sub $30,000 wages the last couple of years I had co workers
> that had to depend on living on that income level. How much
> intereaction do you have?
Most of the people I interact with on a daily basis do very well on much
> I know poor folks and spent the last 7 years servicing computers where
> I bumped into them more often that I was happy about. When I was
> making sub $30,000 wages the last couple of years I had co workers
> that had to depend on living on that income level. How much
> intereaction do you have?
less than $30,000 PER COUPLE per year, and would absolutely LOVE to try
getting by on your idea of "poverty wages" of $30,000 per person.
Heck, Carolyn and I have allowed ourselves $3,000 (total as a couple)
per month for the past 10 years, and in that time have bought a new RV,
a new to us used RV, 3 new cars, and a house that is now paid for, as
well as pumping over $30,000 into fixing the house up. We don't owe
anybody anything, except for the outstanding balance on our credit card
which is paid off every month. If you are so damn stupid that you can't
manage your money, that's not the economy's fault.
Your Liberalism has destroyed your mind.....or what passes for a mind in
morons. Where did you ever get the idea that everyone is entitled to be
rich with no effort on their own part????
Lon
Lone Haranguer
Jul 27, 2012, 9:51:15 PM7/27/12
to
Bruce S wrote:
> On 7/27/2012 3:38 PM, nothermark wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:08:10 -0500, Lone Haranguer
>> <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Did every graduate end up with the same wealth and status?
>>>
>>> If even one became a millionaire, then it wasn't the education
>>> that failed but individual failings.
>>> LZ
>>
A friend of my grade school days was forced by his father to quit
> On 7/27/2012 3:38 PM, nothermark wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:08:10 -0500, Lone Haranguer
>> <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Did every graduate end up with the same wealth and status?
>>>
>>> If even one became a millionaire, then it wasn't the education
>>> that failed but individual failings.
>>> LZ
>>
school after the 8th grade and help on their farm.
He became a millionaire at a very young age because he put to use
what he learned in those 8 years of Catholic school and what he
learned on the farm.
He bought a small piece of land and grew his own variety of seed
corns......and they became popular among his neighbors so he
expanded just enough so the family could do the work and all
could have a good standard of living. He and his wife have
traveled extensively since they only have to work part of the year.
Hard work, 8 years of education and an idea made him successful.
Luck, breaks, special treatment were not involved.
jerryosage
Jul 27, 2012, 10:31:31 PM7/27/12
to
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:03:37 -0500, Lone Haranguer
<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>It's not an accident that some people end up poor and others wealthy.
>LZ
Back inthe spring I reconnected with a guy from HS. He has nothing to
<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>It's not an accident that some people end up poor and others wealthy.
>LZ
show for his life. As the old saying goes, not a pot to piss in nor a
window to throw it thru.
He wasn't dumb, he could learn, but didn't. He seemed to think that
wishing made it happen. He knew exactly what he was going to do. He
could see the destination clearly but never planned the trip. He
seemed to think that if he hung out long enough he would automagically
arrive at his destination.
He is living in about 200 sq feet and shares a bathroom. He is a
miserable old man and blames his lot in life, like so many losers do,
on bad luck. No way it could be his fault.
He was exposed to the same educational opportunities that I was. I
took advantage ot those opportunities and he passed on the education
because he thought that he was too smart to need it.
NotMe
Jul 28, 2012, 1:45:24 PM7/28/12
to
"Bruce S" <bruce...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:50132e39$0$57684$c3e8da3$c8b7...@news.astraweb.com...
> On 7/27/2012 3:38 PM, nothermark wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:08:10 -0500, Lone Haranguer
>> <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Did every graduate end up with the same wealth and status?
>>>
>>> If even one became a millionaire, then it wasn't the education
>>> that failed but individual failings.
>>> LZ
>>
>>
>> So a High school graduate who cannot read his diploma is adequately
>> prepared and it is his fault?
>
> It is absolutely his fault - he went to school for 12 years, and every one
> of those years education mas made available to him. If he failed to take
> advantage of that, and become educated, the only one to blame is him.
There was a story a few years back about an unusually talented athlete
>> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:08:10 -0500, Lone Haranguer
>> <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Did every graduate end up with the same wealth and status?
>>>
>>> If even one became a millionaire, then it wasn't the education
>>> that failed but individual failings.
>>> LZ
>>
>>
>> So a High school graduate who cannot read his diploma is adequately
>> prepared and it is his fault?
>
> It is absolutely his fault - he went to school for 12 years, and every one
> of those years education mas made available to him. If he failed to take
> advantage of that, and become educated, the only one to blame is him.
(could be an urban myth as I've not found a link -- all I get are Penn
State and why athlete should/should not be paid). Made it all the way
through college but miss out of a shot at the pros. Turned out he could
neither read nor write but was give a pass so he could play.
My family works with disadvantaged kids in the foster program. I can point
to more than a few that have been classed as special needs (school system
gets more money) but not offered the help/tutoring.
Many, if not most, of those, when offered proper tutoring (sometimes the
only thing needed was someone that showed a caring interest) these kids did
well.
So no, despite the single examples referenced, the 'it's their own fault for
not trying' line just does not wash in far too many instances.
Frank Howell
Jul 28, 2012, 2:18:00 PM7/28/12
to
with a monopolistic public education system, where the profit or loss that
competition provides is replaced by the politics of power and control that
is inherent in the nature of government bureaucracies.
But another aspect of this problem has to be the parents. Case in point: In
1996 the ACLU sued the Los Angeles School District after a parent discovered
her daughter could only read at the 2nd grade level after failing 10th grade
twice. This gives new meaning to being in the dark, as the only way I see
this happening is for the parent to have her head up her ass for 17 years.
http://tinyurl.com/caeslhb
--
Frank Howell
Lone Haranguer
Jul 28, 2012, 4:23:15 PM7/28/12
to
who never developed motivation on their own. How old must one be
before they grasp that
if they can read, their learning capacity is only limited by
their own actions?
Blame the parents, blame the teachers if you like but
deliberately failing to learn just to get the extra attention is
simply a ploy by a manipulative child.
Our daughter who teaches first grade deals with these kids every
year when a new class starts. She has a good track record for
teaching kids to read.
LZ
>
>
>
Lone Haranguer
Jul 28, 2012, 4:27:34 PM7/28/12
to
educate children these days. They often consider the schools
just a free
baby-sitting service.
LZ
Frank Howell
Jul 28, 2012, 6:39:01 PM7/28/12
to
that's a really awkward sentence. So I'll take a guess that you meant go out
and look at folks using food stamps and I would find them so totally
impoverished that they're clothed in potato sacks and can be seen scooping
up the nightly road kill. :-)
That said, I will admit that what I said in previous post is to a degree a
WAG (guess) without any valid evidence. But where I live(Salem Oregon) I
can't count the times when in a food checkout line that I have seen
customers pay for food with an Oregon Trail debit card. Last stats on this
stated one in seven citizens now receive this benefit.
If you take the maximum food stamp benefit of $622 for 4 people, that
amounts to
$7464 a year extra that they don't spend on food, which leaves some of the
money they earn to spend on what ever they want. I casually know some on
food stamps and do know all the adults have cellphones, but probably not
smartphones. Also their litters, opps I mean kids, seemed to have an endless
supply of toys, the kind that hold interest for about 3 months, that are
soon broken or littering the house or yard along with the discarded beer
caps and the cigarette butts.
Now I admit that I can't use this small sample as a representation for all
food stamp recipients and how they adjust their life styles with that added
income, but $400 a month, the average benefit, can buy a lot of fast food,
smartphones, big screen tvs, etc. all in effect given to them by our elected
gift horses(politicians) just as you stated. :-)
I'll also state that there are some families that really do benefit from
this subsidy and use the extra cash that is made possible with free food to
improve their lives with smart purchases and frugal living and who
understand that purchases for immediate gratification at the expense of long
term goals can only result in long term poverty and would in effect be the
cause of their own demise.
But now to the core of my objection to all these social and economic
progams. No matter the goodness of intentions or their real or imaginary
successes, it's the totality of the costs associated with them and all the
other government spending that if not curtailed will cause economic chaos.
The OMB just came out with the latest deficit number for this year at 1.2
trillion dollars which will bring the total debt to 16 trillion. So in
effect we are not paying for many of these programs, as who knows what
programs are paid for and what programs are represented on borrowed money?
Money borrowed without any provisions to pay down principle, but only the
interest, is no more sound then the interest only or variable reset mortgage
loans that sank many homeowners in the housing bust.
This is the new Grand Illusion and is as fraudulent as Bernie Madoff's
scheme that could only work with new conned participates, but with one
important difference; he had no illusions on what he was doing, but we
pretend willing debt to our children is a consensual act.
--
Frank Howell
Lone Haranguer
Jul 28, 2012, 7:06:20 PM7/28/12
to
government are what it takes to have a thriving economy.
She views the economy as a water wheel with the government
providing the endless supply of rushing water.
She doesn't want anyone to check the water level at the reservoir
upstream.
LZ
Max
Jul 28, 2012, 8:06:20 PM7/28/12
to
RonB
Jul 28, 2012, 8:36:45 PM7/28/12
to
On Thursday, July 26, 2012 9:49:18 AM UTC-5, nothermark wrote:
> Listening to Diane Rehm show talk about Foodstamps. The two states
>
> with the most consumption are Mississippi and Oregon. Mississippi has
>
> the most poor folks and Oregon has the most efficient get your
>
> benefits program. Interesting show for anybody that wants to find the
>
> on line archive.
Timely Post.
> Listening to Diane Rehm show talk about Foodstamps. The two states
>
> with the most consumption are Mississippi and Oregon. Mississippi has
>
> the most poor folks and Oregon has the most efficient get your
>
> benefits program. Interesting show for anybody that wants to find the
>
> on line archive.
We were in WalMart yesterday afternoon. The woman in the checkout line in front of us had two carts. She was very well dressed, spotless makeup and heels. Would have looked about right in a Lexus or Benz. A young fellow, age 12 or so, was pushing the second cart and was also pretty well decked out, wearing nice sunglasses, and was playing with an IPOD while waiting. One cart was pretty full of miscellaneous groceries and the second must have contained at least 25-30 2-liter bottles of soft drinks. The clerk started ringing up what became about a $250 bill, and then out came the Vision welfare card. That required all of the items to be categorized, approved, not approved, etc. BTW - the damned soda was just fine for welfare.
Damn that pisses me off! Not only are they freeloading off us the rest of us, she will probably never pay a penny toward my social security.
RonB
Lone Haranguer
Jul 28, 2012, 8:55:23 PM7/28/12
to
well filled with patients waiting to be treated in the ER.
Soda and snack machines took up a good share of one wall. One
family group, all looking like they were training for Sumo
wrestling, made frequent visits to the machines for sodas and
candy bars. Sodas were $1.50 each and snacks likewise. A close
look at the cards they were swiping through the machines revealed
them to be MN state welfare cards. Now just another credit card
with the bill being sent to the taxpayer.
LZ
nothermark
Jul 29, 2012, 3:22:02 PM7/29/12
to
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 09:51:02 -0700, Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On 7/27/2012 4:54 AM, nothermark wrote:
>>> >Well, the other (much more likely) possibility is that the show was
>>> >right in what they said, but that mark has reported it incorrectly,
>>> >making him wrong - as usual.
>>
>> Partly correct. It was fraction of the state as opposed to raw
>> numbers. May still make it as raw numbers. I do not know.
>
>No, absolutely correct. As usual, you misunderstood what was said, and
>reported it incorrectly.
I think I have not made a mistake more than once or twice before. At
that it was not much of one and easily corrected.
wrote:
>On 7/27/2012 4:54 AM, nothermark wrote:
>>> >Well, the other (much more likely) possibility is that the show was
>>> >right in what they said, but that mark has reported it incorrectly,
>>> >making him wrong - as usual.
>>
>> Partly correct. It was fraction of the state as opposed to raw
>> numbers. May still make it as raw numbers. I do not know.
>
>No, absolutely correct. As usual, you misunderstood what was said, and
>reported it incorrectly.
that it was not much of one and easily corrected.
nothermark
Jul 29, 2012, 3:22:12 PM7/29/12
to
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:11:43 -0700, Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On 7/27/2012 3:38 PM, nothermark wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:08:10 -0500, Lone Haranguer
>> <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Did every graduate end up with the same wealth and status?
>>>
>>> If even one became a millionaire, then it wasn't the education
>>> that failed but individual failings.
>>> LZ
>>
>>
>> So a High school graduate who cannot read his diploma is adequately
>> prepared and it is his fault?
>
>It is absolutely his fault - he went to school for 12 years, and every
>one of those years education mas made available to him. If he failed to
>take advantage of that, and become educated, the only one to blame is him.
But they passed him up a grade every year and told him how well he was
doing. No blame for that system?
wrote:
>On 7/27/2012 3:38 PM, nothermark wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:08:10 -0500, Lone Haranguer
>> <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Did every graduate end up with the same wealth and status?
>>>
>>> If even one became a millionaire, then it wasn't the education
>>> that failed but individual failings.
>>> LZ
>>
>>
>> So a High school graduate who cannot read his diploma is adequately
>> prepared and it is his fault?
>
>It is absolutely his fault - he went to school for 12 years, and every
>one of those years education mas made available to him. If he failed to
>take advantage of that, and become educated, the only one to blame is him.
doing. No blame for that system?
nothermark
Jul 29, 2012, 3:22:13 PM7/29/12
to
the number of folks who did plan the trip and set out to do it then
had the rug pulled out later in life.
I know Xerox targeted everybody under 50 in 1994. They did it because
over 50 got you medical for life. They were already committed. They
got as much of the 30-49 crowd as they could then changed the policy.
That put a lot of us on the street in a shrinking job market.
From what I saw at Kodak another chunk of "over 50" engineers and
technicians are on the street. For all practical purposes their job
prospects suck. No need for 30+ years designing cameras left in this
country.
That has been what happened all over the country for the last 30 years
between the outsourcing and the consolidations. Yes, there are folks
like your school chum. Yes, there are a lot of folks who "did the
right thing" and got bit in the end. That includes a fair number of
entrepreneureal folks who had their own business but depended on
supplying or selling to the big companies and their employee's. A lot
of them went belly up too. The one's that did not are hanging on as
opposed to doing well. If we did not understand "ripple effect" in
the 70's we do now.
nothermark
Jul 29, 2012, 4:06:55 PM7/29/12
to
That was, and often continues to be, the reason used by many folks in
edubusiness. Evidently self esteem is more important than being able
to do the work.
nothermark
Jul 29, 2012, 4:06:57 PM7/29/12
to
On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 11:18:00 -0700, "Frank Howell"
Up to a point I agree.
The point is that in many, probably most, of the cases that bad, the
parents are products of the same system and do not read better than
their children. I think that is the major difference between various
sicioeconomic groups ability to make a living.
If the parents have achieved a reasonable knowledge base they know
when their children do not perform. If the parents are poorly
educated then the children are meeting expectations and nobody hassles
the schools. If everybody in the district is about the same
everything is wonderful for the schools. If it's one of a handfull of
kids in the distirct then often somebody notices and does something.
The point is that in many, probably most, of the cases that bad, the
parents are products of the same system and do not read better than
their children. I think that is the major difference between various
sicioeconomic groups ability to make a living.
If the parents have achieved a reasonable knowledge base they know
when their children do not perform. If the parents are poorly
educated then the children are meeting expectations and nobody hassles
the schools. If everybody in the district is about the same
everything is wonderful for the schools. If it's one of a handfull of
kids in the distirct then often somebody notices and does something.
nothermark
Jul 29, 2012, 4:06:58 PM7/29/12
to
On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 15:23:15 -0500, Lone Haranguer
So your daughter is a good motivtional speaker? ;-)
I applaud your daughter. That is what we need. The problem is that
we have too many schools filled with these folks. As long as Johnny
is doing as well as Mary knowbody admits there is a problem.
I applaud your daughter. That is what we need. The problem is that
we have too many schools filled with these folks. As long as Johnny
is doing as well as Mary knowbody admits there is a problem.
Bruce S
Jul 29, 2012, 8:02:04 PM7/29/12
to
But that does not absolve EVERY individual who attends schools from the
responsibility of gaining the most they can from the experience.
If one person succeeds in school, and the person next to him fails to
learn anything, it is the fault of the individual.
Teachers can't poke a hole in their heads and pour the education in -
the student must do some of the work.
--
Bruce
"The free market punishes irresponsibility. Government rewards it." �
nothermark
Jul 30, 2012, 1:35:35 AM7/30/12
to
On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 17:36:45 -0700 (PDT), RonB <rnrb...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Thought about this later. She might also have been a clerk at any of
the upscale department stores. They work for somewhere between
minimum and twice that but are required to dress upscale. Yes they
get good deals. Yes they are forced to buy a lot of good clothes as
part of their job that does not pay enough to get them off assistance.
wrote:
the upscale department stores. They work for somewhere between
minimum and twice that but are required to dress upscale. Yes they
get good deals. Yes they are forced to buy a lot of good clothes as
part of their job that does not pay enough to get them off assistance.
nothermark
Jul 30, 2012, 1:40:51 AM7/30/12
to
On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 17:02:04 -0700, Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com>
What you are overlooking is that there are whole school systems
working on that level. For the most part the public school system do
a good to excellent job. Where they fall apart is the cities.
As fas as I can tell it has turned into a multigenerational failure so
the students, their parents, and the folks running the schools all
accept the results. To be more precise the folks running the schools
will not make changes that might fix the problem. OTOH they will take
all the money they can screw out of the taxpayer.
working on that level. For the most part the public school system do
a good to excellent job. Where they fall apart is the cities.
As fas as I can tell it has turned into a multigenerational failure so
the students, their parents, and the folks running the schools all
accept the results. To be more precise the folks running the schools
will not make changes that might fix the problem. OTOH they will take
all the money they can screw out of the taxpayer.
nothermark
Jul 30, 2012, 8:19:59 AM7/30/12
to
On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 15:39:01 -0700, "Frank Howell"
Damn spell checkers! I meant "head". As in go look around. ;-)
I would say your description is more or less what they would be doing
if it was not for the welfare state. Add to that the idea that I am
not sure burlap sacks are used much anymore. ;-)
Since we give them some support they get to buy a six pack or bottle
or wide screen TV. Depending on the item that is their entertainment
budget for a significant time. As one engineer put it "I used to pay
more for dinner than the new job pays me for a week." He was making
too much to qualify for anything. ;-) OTOH I do not complain about
the beer on Saturday or the TV amortized over several years as that is
their entertainment budget. Period. One needs something good to keep
going.
>
>That said, I will admit that what I said in previous post is to a degree a
>WAG (guess) without any valid evidence. But where I live(Salem Oregon) I
>can't count the times when in a food checkout line that I have seen
>customers pay for food with an Oregon Trail debit card. Last stats on this
>stated one in seven citizens now receive this benefit.
>
>If you take the maximum food stamp benefit of $622 for 4 people, that
>amounts to
>$7464 a year extra that they don't spend on food, which leaves some of the
>money they earn to spend on what ever they want. I casually know some on
>food stamps and do know all the adults have cellphones, but probably not
>smartphones. Also their litters, opps I mean kids, seemed to have an endless
>supply of toys, the kind that hold interest for about 3 months, that are
>soon broken or littering the house or yard along with the discarded beer
>caps and the cigarette butts.
Cell phones are probably provided free. They "need them to find
work". Probably true as phone numbers, or the lack, are a screening
tool. Toys sound like the typical donation/cheap buyoff deals. TV is
a good thing, smaller litters. ;-)
The thing I do have somewhat of an issue with the food. Cannot buy
cleaning supplies so they have to buy a lot of good food. Better than
we will pay for. OTOH somebody has to buy some fresh stuff so we can
get a deal on the roast that hit it's "sell by". ;-)
>
>Now I admit that I can't use this small sample as a representation for all
>food stamp recipients and how they adjust their life styles with that added
>income, but $400 a month, the average benefit, can buy a lot of fast food,
>smartphones, big screen tvs, etc. all in effect given to them by our elected
>gift horses(politicians) just as you stated. :-)
>
>I'll also state that there are some families that really do benefit from
>this subsidy and use the extra cash that is made possible with free food to
>improve their lives with smart purchases and frugal living and who
>understand that purchases for immediate gratification at the expense of long
>term goals can only result in long term poverty and would in effect be the
>cause of their own demise.
Over the last 20 years I have met a lot of folks who justifiably never
expected to be in the circumstances they were in. That's what happens
in contracting economies. Particularly happens with dual income
families where one wins and one loses in the job lottery. Around here
we have a lot of well educated folks who retired at 55 or so despite
their plans and with the low payout's 401K's are doing these days.
They are the "lucky" ones. I think Oregon is in the same boat.
>
>But now to the core of my objection to all these social and economic
>progams. No matter the goodness of intentions or their real or imaginary
>successes, it's the totality of the costs associated with them and all the
>other government spending that if not curtailed will cause economic chaos.
>
>The OMB just came out with the latest deficit number for this year at 1.2
>trillion dollars which will bring the total debt to 16 trillion. So in
>effect we are not paying for many of these programs, as who knows what
>programs are paid for and what programs are represented on borrowed money?
>
>Money borrowed without any provisions to pay down principle, but only the
>interest, is no more sound then the interest only or variable reset mortgage
>loans that sank many homeowners in the housing bust.
>
>This is the new Grand Illusion and is as fraudulent as Bernie Madoff's
>scheme that could only work with new conned participates, but with one
>important difference; he had no illusions on what he was doing, but we
>pretend willing debt to our children is a consensual act.
I totally agree. That is why I would arrest, try, convict and execute
the whole congress for malfeasance in office. Not likely to happen,
but they deserve it. As long as we are measuring everything based on
consuption and not willing to balace our trade we are stuck. All the
MBA's tell us we are doing fine. Some of the Economists and
Bankruptcy Attorney's are not so sure. Just watching the folks trying
to shout me sown shows the problem.
I would say your description is more or less what they would be doing
if it was not for the welfare state. Add to that the idea that I am
not sure burlap sacks are used much anymore. ;-)
Since we give them some support they get to buy a six pack or bottle
or wide screen TV. Depending on the item that is their entertainment
budget for a significant time. As one engineer put it "I used to pay
more for dinner than the new job pays me for a week." He was making
too much to qualify for anything. ;-) OTOH I do not complain about
the beer on Saturday or the TV amortized over several years as that is
their entertainment budget. Period. One needs something good to keep
going.
>
>That said, I will admit that what I said in previous post is to a degree a
>WAG (guess) without any valid evidence. But where I live(Salem Oregon) I
>can't count the times when in a food checkout line that I have seen
>customers pay for food with an Oregon Trail debit card. Last stats on this
>stated one in seven citizens now receive this benefit.
>
>If you take the maximum food stamp benefit of $622 for 4 people, that
>amounts to
>$7464 a year extra that they don't spend on food, which leaves some of the
>money they earn to spend on what ever they want. I casually know some on
>food stamps and do know all the adults have cellphones, but probably not
>smartphones. Also their litters, opps I mean kids, seemed to have an endless
>supply of toys, the kind that hold interest for about 3 months, that are
>soon broken or littering the house or yard along with the discarded beer
>caps and the cigarette butts.
work". Probably true as phone numbers, or the lack, are a screening
tool. Toys sound like the typical donation/cheap buyoff deals. TV is
a good thing, smaller litters. ;-)
The thing I do have somewhat of an issue with the food. Cannot buy
cleaning supplies so they have to buy a lot of good food. Better than
we will pay for. OTOH somebody has to buy some fresh stuff so we can
get a deal on the roast that hit it's "sell by". ;-)
>
>Now I admit that I can't use this small sample as a representation for all
>food stamp recipients and how they adjust their life styles with that added
>income, but $400 a month, the average benefit, can buy a lot of fast food,
>smartphones, big screen tvs, etc. all in effect given to them by our elected
>gift horses(politicians) just as you stated. :-)
>
>I'll also state that there are some families that really do benefit from
>this subsidy and use the extra cash that is made possible with free food to
>improve their lives with smart purchases and frugal living and who
>understand that purchases for immediate gratification at the expense of long
>term goals can only result in long term poverty and would in effect be the
>cause of their own demise.
expected to be in the circumstances they were in. That's what happens
in contracting economies. Particularly happens with dual income
families where one wins and one loses in the job lottery. Around here
we have a lot of well educated folks who retired at 55 or so despite
their plans and with the low payout's 401K's are doing these days.
They are the "lucky" ones. I think Oregon is in the same boat.
>
>But now to the core of my objection to all these social and economic
>progams. No matter the goodness of intentions or their real or imaginary
>successes, it's the totality of the costs associated with them and all the
>other government spending that if not curtailed will cause economic chaos.
>
>The OMB just came out with the latest deficit number for this year at 1.2
>trillion dollars which will bring the total debt to 16 trillion. So in
>effect we are not paying for many of these programs, as who knows what
>programs are paid for and what programs are represented on borrowed money?
>
>Money borrowed without any provisions to pay down principle, but only the
>interest, is no more sound then the interest only or variable reset mortgage
>loans that sank many homeowners in the housing bust.
>
>This is the new Grand Illusion and is as fraudulent as Bernie Madoff's
>scheme that could only work with new conned participates, but with one
>important difference; he had no illusions on what he was doing, but we
>pretend willing debt to our children is a consensual act.
the whole congress for malfeasance in office. Not likely to happen,
but they deserve it. As long as we are measuring everything based on
consuption and not willing to balace our trade we are stuck. All the
MBA's tell us we are doing fine. Some of the Economists and
Bankruptcy Attorney's are not so sure. Just watching the folks trying
to shout me sown shows the problem.
nothermark
Jul 30, 2012, 8:20:00 AM7/30/12
to
On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 15:27:34 -0500, Lone Haranguer
They are, the schools know it. The question is that if the
"professional educators" know the problem why don't they tailor their
program to address the problem?
"professional educators" know the problem why don't they tailor their
program to address the problem?
nothermark
Jul 30, 2012, 8:20:03 AM7/30/12
to
does it on welfare all the time.
nothermark
Jul 30, 2012, 8:20:03 AM7/30/12
to
they were. Just like the Banks are trying to train us all.
Larry
Jul 30, 2012, 8:56:16 AM7/30/12
to
necessary for mom to keep her job?
mark, wake up! You come up with excuses for EVERYTHING that is wrong
with the welfare system today.
nothermark
Jul 30, 2012, 11:04:01 AM7/30/12
to
12. Anybody that does not provide sunglasses for their children
should be convicted of child abuse. Every once in a while more stuff
comes out about older eye problems coming from damage caused when we
were young.
What my real complaint is comes down to the fact that there is often
more to the story. We do not know who bought the Ipod or what portion
of their toy budget that represented. We do not know what "extra" it
cost to dress the child well as opposed to just dressing him. Probably
not much.
What really gets me is the number of folks who want to ship out jobs
and/or pay so little here that so many folks qualify for assistance.
Then they complain if they dress well for ripping off the system. If
they dress poorly then they complain about their sloppiness.
Mike Hendrix at dot
Jul 30, 2012, 11:49:56 AM7/30/12
to
Sadly, in Mark's world no one is responsible for their station in
life. Businesses are evil and only the Government can step in and
make things "right".
In Mark's world no one is responsible for what happens in their life.
mike
--
Pensacola, FL
http://www.travellogs.us/
Bruce S
Jul 30, 2012, 12:57:42 PM7/30/12
to
On 7/29/2012 10:40 PM, nothermark wrote:
>> >If one person succeeds in school, and the person next to him fails to
>> >learn anything, it is the fault of the individual.
>> >
>> >Teachers can't poke a hole in their heads and pour the education in -
>> >the student must do some of the work.
> What you are overlooking is that there are whole school systems
> working on that level. For the most part the public school system do
> a good to excellent job. Where they fall apart is the cities.
For the most part the public school system is doing a rotten job. If
>> >If one person succeeds in school, and the person next to him fails to
>> >learn anything, it is the fault of the individual.
>> >
>> >Teachers can't poke a hole in their heads and pour the education in -
>> >the student must do some of the work.
> What you are overlooking is that there are whole school systems
> working on that level. For the most part the public school system do
> a good to excellent job. Where they fall apart is the cities.
they were doing a good job, we would not be at the bottom of the list of
education among nations of the world.
Math: China 600, Germany 513, United States 487 (31st place)
Reading: China 556, Korea 539, United States 500 (17th place)
Science: China 575, Finland 554, United States 502 (23rd place)
Our entire public education system is a failure and should be replaced
immediately with a free market system.
bill horne
Jul 30, 2012, 2:07:44 PM7/30/12
to
Bruce S wrote:
> On 7/29/2012 10:40 PM, nothermark wrote:
>
>>> >If one person succeeds in school, and the person next to him fails to
>>> >learn anything, it is the fault of the individual.
>>> >
>>> >Teachers can't poke a hole in their heads and pour the education in -
>>> >the student must do some of the work.
>
>> What you are overlooking is that there are whole school systems
>> working on that level. For the most part the public school system do
>> a good to excellent job. Where they fall apart is the cities.
>
> For the most part the public school system is doing a rotten job. If
> they were doing a good job, we would not be at the bottom of the list
> of education among nations of the world.
>
> Math: China 600, Germany 513, United States 487 (31st place)
>
> Reading: China 556, Korea 539, United States 500 (17th place)
>
> Science: China 575, Finland 554, United States 502 (23rd place)
>
> Our entire public education system is a failure and should be replaced
> immediately with a free market system.
I can't figure out how our system got so bad. Didn't the gummit start
> On 7/29/2012 10:40 PM, nothermark wrote:
>
>>> >If one person succeeds in school, and the person next to him fails to
>>> >learn anything, it is the fault of the individual.
>>> >
>>> >Teachers can't poke a hole in their heads and pour the education in -
>>> >the student must do some of the work.
>
>> What you are overlooking is that there are whole school systems
>> working on that level. For the most part the public school system do
>> a good to excellent job. Where they fall apart is the cities.
>
> For the most part the public school system is doing a rotten job. If
> they were doing a good job, we would not be at the bottom of the list
> of education among nations of the world.
>
> Math: China 600, Germany 513, United States 487 (31st place)
>
> Reading: China 556, Korea 539, United States 500 (17th place)
>
> Science: China 575, Finland 554, United States 502 (23rd place)
>
> Our entire public education system is a failure and should be replaced
> immediately with a free market system.
improving it back in the 60's?........wait.....nevermind.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
nothermark
Jul 30, 2012, 4:32:01 PM7/30/12
to
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:57:42 -0700, Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On 7/29/2012 10:40 PM, nothermark wrote:
>
>>> >If one person succeeds in school, and the person next to him fails to
>>> >learn anything, it is the fault of the individual.
>>> >
>>> >Teachers can't poke a hole in their heads and pour the education in -
>>> >the student must do some of the work.
>
>> What you are overlooking is that there are whole school systems
>> working on that level. For the most part the public school system do
>> a good to excellent job. Where they fall apart is the cities.
>
>For the most part the public school system is doing a rotten job. If
>they were doing a good job, we would not be at the bottom of the list of
>education among nations of the world.
>
>Math: China 600, Germany 513, United States 487 (31st place)
>
>Reading: China 556, Korea 539, United States 500 (17th place)
>
>Science: China 575, Finland 554, United States 502 (23rd place)
>
>Our entire public education system is a failure and should be replaced
>immediately with a free market system.
Depends on the school system. Around here, and I suspect many similar
places, the suburbs do well but the city school system overrides their
numbers with test scores. Now if you want to compare states like NY
and MA with AL or MS it is another deal. That is why I want to see
Federal standards imposed with compliance paid for by the local
system.
wrote:
>On 7/29/2012 10:40 PM, nothermark wrote:
>
>>> >If one person succeeds in school, and the person next to him fails to
>>> >learn anything, it is the fault of the individual.
>>> >
>>> >Teachers can't poke a hole in their heads and pour the education in -
>>> >the student must do some of the work.
>
>> What you are overlooking is that there are whole school systems
>> working on that level. For the most part the public school system do
>> a good to excellent job. Where they fall apart is the cities.
>
>For the most part the public school system is doing a rotten job. If
>they were doing a good job, we would not be at the bottom of the list of
>education among nations of the world.
>
>Math: China 600, Germany 513, United States 487 (31st place)
>
>Reading: China 556, Korea 539, United States 500 (17th place)
>
>Science: China 575, Finland 554, United States 502 (23rd place)
>
>Our entire public education system is a failure and should be replaced
>immediately with a free market system.
places, the suburbs do well but the city school system overrides their
numbers with test scores. Now if you want to compare states like NY
and MA with AL or MS it is another deal. That is why I want to see
Federal standards imposed with compliance paid for by the local
system.
nothermark
Jul 30, 2012, 4:37:01 PM7/30/12
to
Larry
Jul 30, 2012, 5:47:02 PM7/30/12
to
year olds in the world???
> Assuming the kid really was
>12. Anybody that does not provide sunglasses for their children
>should be convicted of child abuse. Every once in a while more stuff
>comes out about older eye problems coming from damage caused when we
>were young.
I guess the lights in WalMart are dangerous to the eyes.
>12. Anybody that does not provide sunglasses for their children
>should be convicted of child abuse. Every once in a while more stuff
>comes out about older eye problems coming from damage caused when we
>were young.
>
>What my real complaint is comes down to the fact that there is often
>more to the story.
You invent the more to the story to make your "give em everything"
>What my real complaint is comes down to the fact that there is often
>more to the story.
seem fair and ballanced.
>We do not know who bought the Ipod or what portion
>of their toy budget that represented.
taxes? I don't.
>We do not know what "extra" it
>cost to dress the child well as opposed to just dressing him. Probably
>not much.
>
>What really gets me is the number of folks who want to ship out jobs
>and/or pay so little here that so many folks qualify for assistance.
You still seem to not understand, people do NOT want to ship jobs out.
>What really gets me is the number of folks who want to ship out jobs
>and/or pay so little here that so many folks qualify for assistance.
The government is pushing the jobs offshore with regulation and taxes.
The businessman would much rather have the jobs here where he has more
control and can run it the way he thinks is best.
Bruce S
Jul 30, 2012, 6:27:26 PM7/30/12
to
should be strictly a free market enterprise - let the people using it
pay for it, and you will see immediate improvements.
nothermark
Jul 30, 2012, 6:57:00 PM7/30/12
to
overpriced indulgences.
>> Assuming the kid really was
>>12. Anybody that does not provide sunglasses for their children
>>should be convicted of child abuse. Every once in a while more stuff
>>comes out about older eye problems coming from damage caused when we
>>were young.
>I guess the lights in WalMart are dangerous to the eyes.
when inside.
>>
>>What my real complaint is comes down to the fact that there is often
>>more to the story.
>
>You invent the more to the story to make your "give em everything"
>seem fair and ballanced.
is where they want to spend their limited entertainment budget then go
for it. I assume they know where to get cheap music to fill it with.
I also assume any sane person has an entertainment budget of some
kind. It is part of staying sane.
>
>>We do not know who bought the Ipod or what portion
>>of their toy budget that represented.
>
>So you think a 12 year old should have a toy budget supplied by my
>taxes? I don't.
>
>>We do not know what "extra" it
>>cost to dress the child well as opposed to just dressing him. Probably
>>not much.
>
>Well decked out sounds expensive to me.
most of her friends and co workers. It takes some time looking for
deals and coupon clipping but it is quite possible to do.
I also used to know a family where the 5 sisters rotated clothes so
they always had a "new" outfit for work.
>>
>>What really gets me is the number of folks who want to ship out jobs
>>and/or pay so little here that so many folks qualify for assistance.
>
>You still seem to not understand, people do NOT want to ship jobs out.
>The government is pushing the jobs offshore with regulation and taxes.
>The businessman would much rather have the jobs here where he has more
>control and can run it the way he thinks is best.
to deliver anywhere or who was supportiing it.
I have talked to multiple business managers who were big proponents of
outsourcing if they could save a penny. Labor cost was their driver.
That means competing with folks who make ~$180/mo. There is a cost
differential for shipping and remote management issues but the bottom
line is cost.
As far as laws go the major issue appears to be clean water and air.
I's stop all imports not produced in a plant that was EPA certified
and monitored. Polluting somewhere else just means it takes longer to
get here.
Lone Haranguer
Jul 30, 2012, 7:17:41 PM7/30/12
to
> On 7/30/2012 1:32 PM, nothermark wrote:
>> Depends on the school system. Around here, and I suspect many
>> similar
>> places, the suburbs do well but the city school system
>> overrides their
>> numbers with test scores.
means they tolerate the high property taxes which people in the
city are unwilling to pay.
>> Now if you want to compare states like NY
>> and MA with AL or MS it is another deal. That is why I want
>> to see
>> Federal standards imposed with compliance paid for by the local
>> system.
Standards don't automatically translate to a better education.
>> and MA with AL or MS it is another deal. That is why I want
>> to see
>> Federal standards imposed with compliance paid for by the local
>> system.
If parents lack interest in the schooling of their children
nothing the schools can do will turn out educated students. I
suggest you talk to teachers who just got their teaching
credentials. Part of the curriculum in local universities is for
teachers to spend a couple of weeks teaching in the inner
cities. After that experience, most teachers realize why inner
city schools have a high dropout rate for students and a high
burn out rate for teachers. Undisciplined students is the
primary cause. Due to political correctness this topic is
usually avoided as a reason why our schools are failing.
LZ
nothermark
Jul 30, 2012, 7:45:00 PM7/30/12
to
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:17:41 -0500, Lone Haranguer
<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7/30/2012 1:32 PM, nothermark wrote:
>>> Depends on the school system. Around here, and I suspect many
>>> similar
>>> places, the suburbs do well but the city school system
>>> overrides their
>>> numbers with test scores.
>More people in the suburbs place a value on education. This
>means they tolerate the high property taxes which people in the
>city are unwilling to pay.
Maybe in Minnesota. In NY the highest cost per pupil is generally the
<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7/30/2012 1:32 PM, nothermark wrote:
>>> Depends on the school system. Around here, and I suspect many
>>> similar
>>> places, the suburbs do well but the city school system
>>> overrides their
>>> numbers with test scores.
>More people in the suburbs place a value on education. This
>means they tolerate the high property taxes which people in the
>city are unwilling to pay.
cities. Part of that is the number of children classed as special ed
but the bottom line is that the money is there. That is what locks in
a lot of teachers. After 5 or 6 years they cannot make more money
anywhere else. I suspect much of the northeast and Michigan are that
way.
>>> Now if you want to compare states like NY
>>> and MA with AL or MS it is another deal. That is why I want
>>> to see
>>> Federal standards imposed with compliance paid for by the local
>>> system.
>Standards don't automatically translate to a better education.
>If parents lack interest in the schooling of their children
>nothing the schools can do will turn out educated students. I
>suggest you talk to teachers who just got their teaching
>credentials. Part of the curriculum in local universities is for
>teachers to spend a couple of weeks teaching in the inner
>cities. After that experience, most teachers realize why inner
>city schools have a high dropout rate for students and a high
>burn out rate for teachers. Undisciplined students is the
>primary cause. Due to political correctness this topic is
>usually avoided as a reason why our schools are failing.
>LZ
a big difference. Anybody meeting or exceeding expectations thinks
they are doing well.
I won't argue with the discipline issue. I will offer that it is more
than political correctness. The teaching community does not want to
admit their system cannot deal with conditions. They would either
need to take a pay cut to increase the number of teachers or admit
that trying to put all students in college does not work or increase
the school day. Probably all three. They are not willing to do that.
nothermark
Jul 31, 2012, 6:30:01 AM7/31/12
to
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 15:27:26 -0700, Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com>
That is what you have now. It is what you are complaining about. That
is unless you expect families to start hiring individal teachers.
is unless you expect families to start hiring individal teachers.
Frank Howell
Jul 31, 2012, 9:36:42 AM7/31/12
to
Child Left Behind"?
States are now nothing more then sharecropper puppets working for the
Plantation Corporation(US) it's court jesters(SC) and it's Royalty(Congress)
overseers who pull the strings. Welcome to Stepin Fetchit Nation, land of
the Jive Ass Obeisnace States.
--
Frank Howell
nothermark
Jul 31, 2012, 10:45:01 AM7/31/12
to
than graduates from other states? That is an issue that can be
addressed with uniform standards.
I never fully figured out NCLB other than it requires testing. AFAIK
the standards are still set by the states. I translate that to they
still are significantly different in various states. What is
different is that all the children in a state should have the same
level of expectations. I do not see that as sufficient.
I do see the major proponents of local control as trying to dodge
providing a decent education or trying to bend the teaching to support
a particular philosphical view. I do not see that as good.
Max
Jul 31, 2012, 10:50:49 AM7/31/12
to
On 7/31/2012 8:45 AM, nothermark wrote:
> I never fully figured out NCLB other than it requires testing. AFAIK
> the standards are still set by the states. I translate that to they
> still are significantly different in various states. What is
> different is that all the children in a state should have the same
> level of expectations. I do not see that as sufficient.
For a realistic comparison try comparing parental involvement in those
> I never fully figured out NCLB other than it requires testing. AFAIK
> the standards are still set by the states. I translate that to they
> still are significantly different in various states. What is
> different is that all the children in a state should have the same
> level of expectations. I do not see that as sufficient.
states.
nothermark
Jul 31, 2012, 11:02:01 AM7/31/12
to
parental involvement. Too many parents have a very poor education
and/are too busy trying to make a living to be very involved. They
know that but it makes a good whipping boy.
Bruce S
Jul 31, 2012, 12:26:25 PM7/31/12
to
free market.
Bruce S
Jul 31, 2012, 12:30:10 PM7/31/12
to
children should be learning in school - or even to force parents to send
their children to school?
Educating children is the responsibility (and right) of the parents.
The government has no business being involved in any way.
nothermark
Jul 31, 2012, 1:34:01 PM7/31/12
to
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:26:25 -0700, Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com>
It is essentially local control. How much do you want to fragment the
market?
market?
nothermark
Jul 31, 2012, 1:35:00 PM7/31/12
to
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:30:10 -0700, Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com>
The only way to produce reasonable voters is to produce reasonably
well educated folks. That has been understood since colonial times.
well educated folks. That has been understood since colonial times.
Bruce S
Jul 31, 2012, 2:15:40 PM7/31/12
to
picking which brand of canned corn you are going to buy. I do not want
the government in the decision making process at all.
Bruce S
Jul 31, 2012, 2:21:36 PM7/31/12
to
your history books, you will learn that it was not a government function
at the time of the founding. It was strictly a private or religious
function. Government has no business being involved in education.
nothermark
Jul 31, 2012, 3:23:01 PM7/31/12
to
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 11:21:36 -0700, Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com>
communities have been banding together to hire teachers since before
the revolution. At that time the common books were the Bible and Greek
classics.
What you advocate is the ultimate balkanization of the country. Every
little splinter group gets to teach it's children their version of the
"truth" and for get to teach anything they do not approve of.
What I want is a solid background in Reading, Writing and Arithmetic
through introductory Calculus. I'd make the last one credit free but
not grade free if it became an issue. Folks would get a much better
clue with come calc and statistics. One can dumb down both and still
teach the concepts. We also need to revamp history to put back the
messy parts.
the revolution. At that time the common books were the Bible and Greek
classics.
What you advocate is the ultimate balkanization of the country. Every
little splinter group gets to teach it's children their version of the
"truth" and for get to teach anything they do not approve of.
What I want is a solid background in Reading, Writing and Arithmetic
through introductory Calculus. I'd make the last one credit free but
not grade free if it became an issue. Folks would get a much better
clue with come calc and statistics. One can dumb down both and still
teach the concepts. We also need to revamp history to put back the
messy parts.
Max
Jul 31, 2012, 3:33:24 PM7/31/12
to
Mike Hendrix at dot
Jul 31, 2012, 3:54:29 PM7/31/12
to
Max, you have to remember that in Mark's world no one is responsible
for themselves, or their children.---------- The government is.
nothermark
Jul 31, 2012, 4:10:01 PM7/31/12
to
lot of parents cannot teach their children their school work for a lot
of good reasons.
I cannot recall getting significant help from my parents as they
expected the school to teach me and they were not stupid people who
did not value education. The idea that parents should be involved is
evolved as the schools needed to have somebody to blame.
My buddy the retired teacher has an amusing tale about his father and
the one of his math teachers. It seems Dad questioned the teacher
about what he was teaching and was told that since he had a teaching
certificate he knew more about it than any parent. Dad was working on
hid third advanced degree in math. ;-)
FWIW - the former is a good indication of why the burbs have better
schools. The inner city teachers live there along with many of the
professionals so any teacher that screws up is quickly caught up by
parents that do know what they are talking about. That is seldom the
case in the inner city.
Albert
Jul 31, 2012, 4:13:06 PM7/31/12
to
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 11:21:36 -0700, Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com>
This is the most simplistic rendition of US history that I've seen you
post so far. We are so fortunate that your prejudiced likes and
dislikes has no relevancy in the real world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_education_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_education_in_the_United_States#Colonial_era
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_education_in_the_United_States#South
post so far. We are so fortunate that your prejudiced likes and
dislikes has no relevancy in the real world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_education_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_education_in_the_United_States#Colonial_era
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_education_in_the_United_States#South
Message has been deleted
LonVanOstran
Jul 31, 2012, 6:45:45 PM7/31/12
to
nothermark wrote:
> It's not that I want the "nanny state". It is that I recognize that a
> lot of parents cannot teach their children their school work for a lot
> of good reasons.
Wrong again. There is no such thing as a good reason for having children
> It's not that I want the "nanny state". It is that I recognize that a
> lot of parents cannot teach their children their school work for a lot
> of good reasons.
and then neglecting them. Only a liberal fool like you could believe
otherwise.
People who can't take care of children should not have them.
Lon
LonVanOstran
Jul 31, 2012, 6:46:59 PM7/31/12
to
nothermark wrote:
> I cannot recall getting significant help from my parents as they
> expected the school to teach me and they were not stupid people who
> did not value education.
Enough said!!!!!!
> I cannot recall getting significant help from my parents as they
> expected the school to teach me and they were not stupid people who
> did not value education.
Lon
LonVanOstran
Jul 31, 2012, 6:48:34 PM7/31/12
to
Bruce S wrote:
> Where does the government get the authority to tell parents what their
> children should be learning in school - or even to force parents to send
> their children to school?
>
> Educating children is the responsibility (and right) of the parents. The
> government has no business being involved in any way.
>
> --
> Bruce
Mark is living proof of the validity of your view.
> Where does the government get the authority to tell parents what their
> children should be learning in school - or even to force parents to send
> their children to school?
>
> Educating children is the responsibility (and right) of the parents. The
> government has no business being involved in any way.
>
> --
> Bruce
Lon
LonVanOstran
Jul 31, 2012, 6:50:09 PM7/31/12
to
nothermark wrote:
> The only way to produce reasonable voters is to produce reasonably
> well educated folks. That has been understood since colonial times.
Educated in what?
> The only way to produce reasonable voters is to produce reasonably
> well educated folks. That has been understood since colonial times.
You babble more bullshit than anybody I've ever encountered, and I've
encountered some world champion bullshitters.
Lon
LonVanOstran
Jul 31, 2012, 6:57:12 PM7/31/12
to
Dean wrote:
> It's called "home schooling".
>
Actually, home schooling is a very bad choice for educating kids,
surpassed on the negative end, only by public schools. Most parents
aren't qualified to teach school, but most do a much better job than
public schools.
Lon
>
Actually, home schooling is a very bad choice for educating kids,
surpassed on the negative end, only by public schools. Most parents
aren't qualified to teach school, but most do a much better job than
public schools.
Lon
nothermark
Jul 31, 2012, 7:07:01 PM7/31/12
to
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 16:24:53 -0600, Dean <roa...@k7no.com> wrote:
really could do it in today's world.
>It's called "home schooling".
That's heavy duty parental involvement. I wonder how many parents
really could do it in today's world.
Bruce S
Jul 31, 2012, 7:23:41 PM7/31/12
to
schooled kids scored at about the 85th percentile when compared to
everyone else taking the tests. And remember that (by definition)
public schools test at the 50th percentile. As I recall, Catholic
schools score out somewhere around the 75th percentile, and they were
the best of the private schools.
Just to be sure, I looked it up and, sure enough, Home schoolers were
around the 85th percentile.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hslda.org%2Fdocs%2Fstudy%2Fcomp2001%2FHomeSchoolAchievement.pdf
I was surprised to see that even if the parents did not have a high
school education, the kids still were far ahead of their public school
counterparts.
The more I look at the study, the more I believe that no child should
ever be permitted to enter public school. Every one of them should be
home schooled. Of course, the numbers are skewed in favor of home
schoolers because those parents care enough to ensure that their kids
get an education - regardless of how inconvenient it is to the parents.
Parent - it's a verb.
Lone Haranguer
Jul 31, 2012, 7:45:47 PM7/31/12
to
free time, either my wife or I would visit the teacher and ask
that they be loaded down with more work, both homework and school
work. Good grades were rewarded.....just like in the real
world. We kept a close eye on our grandchildren's school reports
too......all the way through college. Probably a reason none of
them had trouble finding a good job.
LZ
Lone Haranguer
Jul 31, 2012, 7:54:53 PM7/31/12
to
However a dedicated stay-at-home parent can easily do a better
job than most public schools are doing. With the advent of the
computer, lesson plans furnished by the state are available and
the parent can teach a lot more than a public school teacher in a
given amount of time.
LZ
nothermark
Jul 31, 2012, 8:03:01 PM7/31/12
to
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 16:23:41 -0700, Bruce S <bruce...@gmail.com>
You ignored the other issue. Most folks who choose home schooling are
well enough educated to do it.
That selection leaves a lot of folks out.
well enough educated to do it.
That selection leaves a lot of folks out.
Bruce S
Jul 31, 2012, 8:06:19 PM7/31/12
to
parents who did not even have a high school education did MUCH better
than public school kids.
READ THE LINK MORON.
LonVanOstran
Jul 31, 2012, 8:27:55 PM7/31/12
to
too much like the argument Liberals use to defend Obama.
For the record, I made it clear that I believe home schooling is better
than public schools. But I believe private schools are mostly better.
Lon
LonVanOstran
Jul 31, 2012, 8:28:30 PM7/31/12
to
nothermark wrote:
> Most folks who choose home schooling are
> well enough educated to do it.
Please support that with evidence.
> Most folks who choose home schooling are
> well enough educated to do it.
Lon
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages