This is why the USA needs to spend a shit load more money on public education
chazwin
http://msvids.blogspot.com/2009/11/americans-are-not-stupid-with-subtitles.html
This is why the USA needs to spend a shit load more money on public
education
Brad Harrington
You have it ass-backwards, as usual. It's the money that we've already
poured
down the drain for public "education" that has reduced us to that sorry
state.
Our level of knowledge has plummeted in inverse proportion to the amount of
money we've wasted on it.
The answer would be to terminate public education completely.
Brad Harrington
Fred Weiss
wrote:
> Our level of knowledge has plummeted in inverse proportion to the amount of
> money we've wasted on it.
>
> The answer would be to terminate public education completely.
Second the motion.
The socialist's solution to all of their failures is to pour more
money into it.
Marva Collins and Maria Montessori demonstrated - on shoe string
budgets - what children could learn with the right teaching and
motivation.
Also, studies have shown that homeschooled kids - learning on a
kitchen table - do as well if not better than public school kids.
Fred Weiss
Matt Barrow
"Brad Harrington" <timeforeve...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:hdigfp$br9$1...@vulture.killfile.org...
>> Chazwin wrote:
>>
>
http://msvids.blogspot.com/2009/11/americans-are-not-stupid-with-subtitles.html
>> This is why the USA needs to spend a shit load more money on public
>> education
>
> You have it ass-backwards, as usual. It's the money that we've already
> poured down the drain for public "education" that has reduced us to that
> sorry state. Our level of knowledge has plummeted in inverse proportion to
> the amount of
> money we've wasted on it.
Current "education" is concrete-bound rather than conceptual. Even aside
from the indoctrination, it turns our kids into mental basket cases that
never progress beyond the most superficial.
Matt Barrow
Larkspur, CO
x
x
x
x
x
1Z
> Current "education" is concrete-bound rather than conceptual. Even aside
> from the indoctrination, it turns our kids into mental basket cases that
> never progress beyond the most superficial.
Wasn't someone telling me the other day that the US
does all the world's scientific research and produces
all the Nobel winners?
all
1Z
> Also, studies have shown that homeschooled kids - learning on a
> kitchen table - do as well if not better than public school kids.
How's their grasp of evolution?
Brad Harrington
>> Our level of knowledge has plummeted in inverse proportion to the
>> amount of money we've wasted on it.
>> The answer would be to terminate public education completely.
> Second the motion.
> The socialist's solution to all of their failures is to pour more
> money into it.
Ain't that the truth. And yet the statistical correlation between
increased funding and plummeting results is damn near 1:1; something
virtually unheard of in statistics when applied to human behavior. But
don't confuse the social engineers with the facts.
> Marva Collins and Maria Montessori demonstrated - on shoe string
> budgets - what children could learn with the right teaching and
> motivation.
> Also, studies have shown that homeschooled kids - learning on a
> kitchen table - do as well if not better than public school kids.
My sister home-schooled her kids. They are MUCH better educated
than your typical by-product of the public "educational" system, which
is much more geared towards "socialization" and indoctrination than it
is to education.
The current state of our "educational" system is an absolute farce;
that video of Chazwin's, despite the fact that Chazwin incorrectly
identifies its cause, really says it all. We have raised a generation
of morons who have no past and therefore no future...
Brad Harrington
1Z
wrote:
> My sister home-schooled her kids.
How's *their* grasp of evolution?
Brad Harrington
>> My sister home-schooled her kids.
> 1Z wrote:
> How's *their* grasp of evolution?
Quite good, actually. JulieAnne, my niece, is now a microbiology major,
and we've had quite a few discussions on the subject. She intends to
write her thesis on evolutionary nanotechnology.
What's your point, anyway? Just out of curiosity.
Brad Harrington
1Z
wrote:
> What's your point, anyway?
Your implication that homeschooling *isn't* geared to
indoctrination
http://cragar.wordpress.com/2007/10/25/religion-and-home-schooling/
1Z
> The socialist's solution to all of their failures is to pour more
> money into it.
Well. there are excellent systems of public education in the
world. Aren't there, Fred?
Matt Barrow
>> money into it.
>
> increased funding and plummeting results is damn near 1:1; something
> virtually unheard of in statistics when applied to human behavior. But
> don't confuse the social engineers with the facts.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=512549
/quote
But it is not just taxation that is chasing corporations out of America.
Another top consideration is access to talent. The U.S. now spends more per
capita on public education than any other OECD country, but its students
test in the bottom decile.
The U.S. Government's National Assessment of Educational Progress generates
the "Nation's Report Card" annually. For the last 10 years, less than 25% of
American high school seniors achieved a rating of "proficient" in either
math or science. In August 2009, the ACT test service announced that only
23% of this year's high school graduates tested adequately in reading,
writing, math and science to succeed in college. This is a national
embarrassment.
/end quote
In addition to generating a couple generations of morons, the teachers
retirement programs are insulting them from the fallout incumbent of their
incompetence.
Matt Barrow
Larkspur, CO
Brad Harrington
>> What's your point, anyway?
> 1Z wrote:
> Your implication that homeschooling *isn't* geared to
> indoctrination
Home schooling, like any other tool, can be misused by the
user.
Just because a screwdriver can be used to stab someone,
however, does not mean that it is any less effective at turning
screws as compared to the use of a toothpick.
When you nationalize the school system and place its control
in the hands of the state, indoctrination is guaranteed. He who
controls the dollars controls the content, and there's not a
gov't on the planet that has any interest in free-thinking citizens.
Compared to that travesty, I'll take a little creationist junk as
the price to pay any day of the week. Being obfuscated on a
particular issue is nothing when placed against the complete
destruction of the conceptual faculty.
Brad Harrington
1Z
wrote:
> When you nationalize the school system and place its control
> in the hands of the state, indoctrination is guaranteed.
Hysterical nonsense. If the state is in the control of the people,
why would it iindoctrinate? If people don't want their children
indoctrinated all they have to do is vote for politicians
who don't want to indoctrinate.
> He who
> controls the dollars controls the content, and there's not a
> gov't on the planet that has any interest in free-thinking citizens.
If you have a healthy demcoracy, it is the citizens who are in the
driving seat.
> Compared to that travesty, I'll take a little creationist junk as
> the price to pay any day of the week.
Yeah, right. How abou tellign us *what* the
evil US govt. is indoctrinating people with?
Being obfuscated on a
> particular issue is nothing when placed against the complete
> destruction of the conceptual faculty.
"complete"? More hysterical nonsese.
Arnold Broese
news:9f92c675-1f3b-4e2b...@o10g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
>
> If you have a healthy demcoracy, it is the citizens who are in the
> driving seat.
Chileans voted in a Marxist state. Democracy is a lynch mob in action, it is
two wolves and a sheep voting on what to eat for dinner. Majorities do not
determine the truth; only reason can do that.
--
Arnold
Puppet_Sock
[snips]
> http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=512549
>
> /quote
[snips]
> The U.S. Government's National Assessment of Educational Progress generates
> the "Nation's Report Card" annually. For the last 10 years, less than 25% of
> American high school seniors achieved a rating of "proficient" in either
> math or science. In August 2009, the ACT test service announced that only
> 23% of this year's high school graduates tested adequately in reading,
> writing, math and science to succeed in college. This is a national
> embarrassment.
>
> /end quote
This contains a non-trivial part of the problem. Highschools in the
USA are
largely geared towards getting their grads into college. The notion is
that
the ideal is for everybody to go to college, that any student who does
not so do is a failure.
The result is a lot of people who are neither talented enough for nor
motivated enough for the situation. When somebody has spent four
years (or there abouts) dreading every day of highschool, dreaming of
the day when their only daily chores are a "fries with that job", to
send
them to college is a cruel joke and a huge waste of everybody's time.
That 23 percent might not actually be that far off a reasonable
result.
If, that is, the rest were prepared in some way to be citizens.
Instead of pushing everybody towards college, the schools should be
trying to help the students figure out where they can make a good
life for themselves. Maybe this student isn't all that fabulous at
math
or science, but can gab the plugs on a Nissan in about 8 minutes.
Maybe that student does not really care a fig about history or
geography,
but he can wire up a house in an hour and a half, and have it pass
inspection and be up to code. Maybe this other sudent is umoved
by considerations of the meaning of metaphysics, but she can
find the problem in a colour TV in 45 seconds, and be right every
time.
And, maybe there really are students who are below average. Maybe
we would all be better off if those students had a way to lead lives
that were productive, useful, and rewarding. And maybe they'd have
a better chance at it if their not going to college was not trumpeted
as a huge failure of "the system" to do enough for them. Let them
find their own way, give them a few nudges to keep them moving,
and don't get too excited if they are not interested in college.
It's not Lake Wobegone after all.
Socks
Matt Barrow
"Puppet_Sock" <puppe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:42c22294-67c4-4c9d...@z7g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 17, 7:29 am, Matt Barrow <matt_bar...@coax.net> wrote:
> [snips]
>> http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=512549
>>
>> /quote
> [snips]
>> The U.S. Government's National Assessment of Educational Progress
>> generates
>> the "Nation's Report Card" annually. For the last 10 years, less than 25%
>> of
>> American high school seniors achieved a rating of "proficient" in either
>> math or science. In August 2009, the ACT test service announced that only
>> 23% of this year's high school graduates tested adequately in reading,
>> writing, math and science to succeed in college. This is a national
>> embarrassment.
>>
>> /end quote
> [snips]
>
> This contains a non-trivial part of the problem. Highschools in the
> USA are
> largely geared towards getting their grads into college. The notion is
> that
> the ideal is for everybody to go to college, that any student who does
> not so do is a failure.
Quite so.
Evidently elementary school is prep for high school, high school is prep for
college and college is prep for...what?
Education is NOT supposed to be mere preparatory for a job or even a career.
In the article quoted, the writers are bewailing the utter lack of job
skills for the coming future of industry, but I'd add that education doesn't
prepare them for most any facet of life other than as milch cows and
servants for the elites.
Ever deal with people in their 40's and 50's and end up befuddled that
you're actually dealing with someone in their teens?
Ask some of these tech savvy young about how something (like an iPod, etc)
works and they'll tell you how to USE it, but be totally ignorant of how it
OPERATES.
Matt
1Z
wrote:
> Chileans voted in a Marxist state. Democracy is a lynch mob in action,
Democracy is the system that holds in every coutnry worth living in.
>it is
> two wolves and a sheep voting on what to eat for dinner. Majorities do not
> determine the truth; only reason can do that.
Believe it or not, every tyrant everywhere thinks reason on his side.
How do you propose to settle arguments about whose reason is
really reasonable? With force?
RichD
> http://msvids.blogspot.com/2009/11/americans-are-not-stupid-with-subt...
>
> This is why the USA needs to spend a shit load more
> money on public education
uh, yeah, let's be brainiacs like Brits..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/901723.stm
Mob attack - they thought pediatrician = pedophile.
That's the inevitable result of socialism and
gun control, which cause chromosome damage.
But cheer up, chaz, we're close behind you,
down the collectivist cesspool...
PS In China, the Party chairman advised
emperor Oboyama to move toward a market
economy...
--
Rich
Fred Weiss
> How do you propose to settle arguments about whose reason is
> really reasonable? With force?
That's your position, isn't it?
Fred Weiss
1Z
No.
Fred Weiss
Oh, you're no longer for the majority forcing its will on the country?
Fred Weiss
x
x
x
x
Fred Weiss
I'm impressed with the Swedish model. Parents are given complete free
choice in the selection of schools for their children. Of course
Sweden being Sweden, the state pays for it. All they have to do now is
phase out that part of it - perhaps via tax credits - and it will be
perfect.
Don't you agree, Izzy (who is always claiming he is not a socialist)?
Fred Weiss
1Z
> I'm impressed with the Swedish model. Parents are given complete free
> choice in the selection of schools for their children. Of course
> Sweden being Sweden, the state pays for it. All they have to do now is
> phase out that part of it - perhaps via tax credits - and it will be
> perfect.
> Don't you agree, Izzy (who is always claiming he is not a socialist)?
No. You just end up with a system that exacerbates the disadvantages
of the disadvantaged and wastes the talents of the poor.
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=878
I'm impressed with the Finnish education system
which is the best in the world, and thoroughly egalitarian.
The evidence is against, but you'll always put ideology
first won't you Fred (who is always saying he believes in
the "facts of reality"(
chazwin
> On Nov 17, 6:19�am, 1Z <peterdjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On 13 Nov, 23:30, Fred Weiss <fredwe...@papertig.com> wrote:
>
> > > The socialist's solution to all of their failures is to pour more
> > > money into it.
>
> > Well. there are excellent systems of public education in the
> > world. Aren't there, Fred?
>
> I'm impressed with the Swedish model. Parents are given complete free
> choice in the selection of schools for their children. Of course
> Sweden being Sweden, the state pays for it. All they have to do now is
> phase out that part of it - perhaps via tax credits - and it will be
> perfect.
You can be as impressed as you like, but this model is hardly
applicable to the USA.
Phasing out government sponsored education will never happen in Sweden
and would be an unmitigated disaster in all countries that now enjoy
it.
You are thick as pig shit if you really think for a moment about what
you have deemed 'perfect'. What an idiot you are. You lack
imagination.
Fred Weiss
> ... You lack imagination.
It's not me - but you and Izzy - who can only see what is and not what
could be.
What it boils down to is that I am an idealist and progressive. You
and Izzy are pragmatists and reactionaries.
Fred Weiss
Fred Weiss
> ...You just end up with a system that exacerbates the disadvantages
> of the disadvantaged and wastes the talents of the poor.
But my good Izzy that is *exactly* what predominantly happens in the
US now.
It was not public education but Marva Collins and Maria Montessori who
solved that problem.
Marva Collins for example has 5yr. old ghetto kids reading
Shakespeare!
Fred Weiss
1Z
> On Nov 23, 7:14�am, 1Z <peterdjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > ...You just end up with a system that exacerbates the disadvantages
> > of the disadvantaged and wastes the talents of the poor.
>
> But my good Izzy that is *exactly* what predominantly happens in the
> US now.
Uh-huh. And what of your claim that the US in the only country in the
world that can innovate?
chazwin
Hahahaha. Don't make me laugh!! You are so fucking parochial Zionist
fascist.
I can just see you. A big fat yank with a loud shirt and a wife called
Martha. You think that you have seen the world because you went on a
tour of Europe in 1989, doing 10 capitals in 3 weeks. You were the
noisiest people in restaurants and the locals would cringe when ever
you asked for ketchup and coke with your dinner.
You are blinkered and narrow minded. Progressive to you means letting
women have the vote and considering the possibility that others might
prefer Pepsi.
And Idealist?? Wow a Kantian on a Randroid web-site - now I've heard
everything!
Jim Klein
>Progressive to you means letting
> women have the vote...
Bush league. I don't /let/ anyone have the vote, at
least not over my life.
Progressive to you means letting anyone have the
vote over a life, except he to whom it belongs.
jk
1Z
> Bush league. I don't /let/ anyone have the vote, at
> least not over my life.
>
> Progressive to you means letting anyone have the
> vote over a life, except he to whom it belongs.
And does "life" actually mean "life" here....?
Jim Klein
Sure, though I meant specifically a human life,
which in turn means one motivated by an
internal, conceptual choosing process,
historically called free will.
Why, what was your point anyway?
jk
1Z
> Sure, though I meant specifically a human life,
> which in turn means one motivated by an
> internal, conceptual choosing process,
> historically called free will.
>
> Why, what was your point anyway?
>
> jk
That is silly to commute "there are certain things
I must and must not do" into "my life has been taken
away".
Other people are not voting to
have you put in front of a firing squad and shot;
they are voting on how much tax you (and they)
pay, how fast you (and they) can drive, etc.
Matt Barrow
Watch your terms, Fred; today, "progressives" (aka, "liberals") are in fact
extremely reactionary and authoritarian.
In fact, so called "progressives" are quite regressive with many notions
that go back to primitive eras. So much for their calling objective types
"Neanderthals".
http://abcdunlimited.com/ideas/reactionary.html
Matt
1Z
> "Fred Weiss" <fredwe...@papertig.com> wrote in message ...
> Watch your terms, Fred; today, "progressives" (aka, "liberals") are in fact
> extremely reactionary and authoritarian.
is that a fact ?