|
Education (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ziptnf |
| Education should be a right just as much as owning a ing firearm is. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by ziptnf
Education should be a right just as much as owning a ing firearm is. |
You still have to pay for that firearm and ammunition with real money, right? You can't just walk into a gun store and demand a rifle and free ammo just because you have a constitutional right to own a gun. You are not exempt from paying for it.
I think Atbell properly noted that the original threat starter video is specifically referring to post-secondary eduction (college and beyond). I ran with the video and specifically railed on the for-profit education industry which has been demonstrated to 1) cost at least as much as highly regarded universities and private colleges while 2) providing significantly inferior outcomes, 3) with significantly higher default rates that, 4) taxpayers are largely on the hook for.
Talk about an easy budget cut item that is not producing the results and costing the government (i.e. taxpayers) billions every year. Oddly, it is poorly-informed Republicans that are largely standing up for this disgraceful industry while it is Democrats (led by the likes of Tom Harkin, Al Frankin and others) that are correctly going after the corruption and fraud that is rife in the industry.
As an aside, I stringently adhere to the belief that if something is going to be a right, it can't come at the cost of someone else's liberty. i.e. you can't just "give away" education--someone has to pay for it. Just because it was "free" to you, doesn't mean it wasn't funded by someone else. In my world the person who is doing the funding should have a much greater say than the person who is receiving all of the benefit. I don't believe that "free" healthcare is a "right" as it can't be achieved without a doctor providing a service. If the doctor is deprived of proper compensation for his services then someone is receiving a "right" while another person is being similarly deprived of one (the contractual business right to receive compensation for services rendered).
Our government cannot continue to "give" stuff away (which really adds up to vote buying and politicking). And the more stuff that is given away, the bigger our deficits become and the harder it is to reverse ill-thought policies. Suddenly people can't do without their new entitlements and the assumption is just that the entitlements are rights and if they cannot be funded, well then the rich must simply not be paying their fair share and must be penalized even more for the sake of the have-nots. |
|
|
| Comrade Stalin |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
You still have to pay for that firearm and ammunition with real money, right? You can't just walk into a gun store and demand a rifle and free ammo just because you have a constitutional right to own a gun. You are not exempt from paying for it.
I think Atbell properly noted that the original threat starter video is specifically referring to post-secondary eduction (college and beyond). I ran with the video and specifically railed on the for-profit education industry which has been demonstrated to 1) cost at least as much as highly regarded universities and private colleges while 2) providing significantly inferior outcomes, 3) with significantly higher default rates that, 4) taxpayers are largely on the hook for.
Talk about an easy budget cut item that is not producing the results and costing the government (i.e. taxpayers) billions every year. Oddly, it is poorly-informed Republicans that are largely standing up for this disgraceful industry while it is Democrats (led by the likes of Tom Harkin, Al Frankin and others) that are correctly going after the corruption and fraud that is rife in the industry.
As an aside, I stringently adhere to the belief that if something is going to be a right, it can't come at the cost of someone else's liberty. i.e. you can't just "give away" education--someone has to pay for it. Just because it was "free" to you, doesn't mean it wasn't funded by someone else. In my world the person who is doing the funding should have a much greater say than the person who is receiving all of the benefit. I don't believe that "free" healthcare is a "right" as it can't be achieved without a doctor providing a service. If the doctor is deprived of proper compensation for his services then someone is receiving a "right" while another person is being similarly deprived of one (the contractual business right to receive compensation for services rendered).
Our government cannot continue to "give" stuff away (which really adds up to vote buying and politicking). And the more stuff that is given away, the bigger our deficits become and the harder it is to reverse ill-thought policies. Suddenly people can't do without their new entitlements and the assumption is just that the entitlements are rights and if they cannot be funded, well then the rich must simply not be paying their fair share and must be penalized even more for the sake of the have-nots. |
The taxpayers rightfully pay for it. That is not to say we don't need substantial educational, fiscal, and governmental reform. Education is certainly far more valuable than million dollar, one-time-use, cruise missiles. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by Comrade Stalin
Some of the taxpayers pay for it. That is not to say we don't need substantial educational, fiscal, and governmental reform. Education is certainly far more valuable than million dollar, one-time-use, cruise missiles. |
|
|
|
| Zharen |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
Talk about an easy budget cut item that is not producing the results and costing the government (i.e. taxpayers) billions every year. Oddly, it is poorly-informed Republicans that are largely standing up for this disgraceful industry while it is Democrats (led by the likes of Tom Harkin, Al Frankin and others) that are correctly going after the corruption and fraud that is rife in the industry.
|
Are you blaming the Republicans and siding with the Dems on this issue? Wow, the world has changed. :cool: |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zharen
Are you blaming the Republicans and siding with the Dems on this issue? Wow, the world has changed. :cool: |
On this issue, largely yes, because the Republicans clearly can't see the real picture here. They are being opposition purely for the sake of being opposition. If you've watched any of the hearings on this issue, Republicans like John McCain have shown up to lob a few complaints and misplaced accusations at the behest of Lanny Davis and promptly left the room. It's pure politics and it's deplorable. |
|
|
| atbell |
| quote: | Originally posted by Igneous01
this.
I have mixed feeling about education, with there being two main problems with it:
1. Its too specialized, when times change, certain skills that were so rigorously trained become obsolete, hence the person needs to either go back to school again to learn something new, or end up in the gutter.
|
I've noticed this trend in some of the academics I've worked with / had contact with. The worst thing to deal with are the egos. One Ph.D. I was talking with tried to dismis me because I hadn't read some book in her feild. I almost pointed out that it was because I was busy learning how to make computers but decided that it would probably be lost on her.
I think that part of the obsession with specialists comes from the rabid adoption of capitalisim based loosely on Smith's (passing) comments on how specialization improved production. The fact is that a number of specialists I know are only specialists because they can't do anything else, not because they are good at what they do.
Specialization, particularily in academics, also makes the specialists more ardent when defending thier bred winning brains. It's odd to think that if a student in an undergraduate course proves a prof. to be wrong the rest of the class can justifiably begin asking why it is the prof. and not the student standing behind the podium.
| quote: |
so while it might lead to drastic consequences in government funding education down the road, i cant help but feel there is some responsibility to be held onto these establishments of education that the quality is slowly going down the drain. Opting for the more "earn your diploma in six months" kind of thing, and miss out on some major aspects of the subject.
|
Another difficulty I have with graduate level experiences that I've had is that being responsible and studying things that might be useful is basically dismised as pandering (or something like that). This isn't a topic I've run in to as much but it's almost as if 'research for research's sake' has been adopted to imply that all research in publicly funded universities MUST be disconected with the general society. ... it could also be a problem that I've run into more people in the humanities graduate society than those in science who have tangible "look what I did" moments of finding new materials, chemicals, etc.
| quote: |
also, i think a school on mental health and civilized discussion is necessary. I cant tell you how many times ive read through physics and science forums only to find people calling names and acting like little children when someone presents or challenges an idea. Then as a final resort wave their phd's around claiming they are an authoritative figure on the subject and know whats right and wrong (without having to test the idea first). Kind of funny to read, but also kind of sad knowing that these supposed great minds are leading us into the future - and they cant properly discuss ideas with each other (let alone actually test them and scrutinize them) |
Here here.
One of the things that the internet is really doing is bringing traditional academic structures to question. When confronted with direct opposition quality academics should be able to state thier point in a robust manner and bow out if it isn't thier specialty.
I was talking about economics with one of my friends a while back and he pointed out that many at his place of work were Ph.D's in things financial. But, as mentioned earlier, specialization doesn't mean good in the whole subject. Ph.D's can be earned by scrutinizing a single data set. It might be long and there may be all kinds of elements to it but the fact is that if it is a data set about colour preferences in the revenue generation model of the fashion industry that doesn't grant huge insight into the bond markets. |
|
|
| atbell |
| quote: | Originally posted by The Potter
At a time when there is a general consensus among experts and leading CEO's that America's economy is in part suffering because of a lack of investment in skills and education, I am flabbergasted with the attacks on teachers. Surely, if you are looking to increase the quality of teachers, the best graduates need to be lured by at least semi-attactive salaries. Also, the McKinsey report shows that in the best-performing countries, teaching is a highly respected and valued profession, which attracts a certain calibre of graduates. At the moment, in certain quarters of the US, teachers are being denigrated as overpaid, lazy and benefit-hungry leeches. I know budgets have to be balanced, but you don't do it by first targeting one of the key drivers of a successful economy. Surely, the return on investment is greater for every dollar spent on creating a more educated and flexible workforce, compared with a dollar spent on reducing the taxes for the wealthiest 2%. Also, what's with denying collective bargaining rights? Is the ability to freely associate not a fundamental right? If corporations can collectively lobby governments, then why can't teachers?
http://www.suite101.com/content/how...systems-a309913
http://www.bukisa.com/articles/4134...e-world-top-ten
http://www.mckinsey.com/App_Media/R...stems_Final.pdf |
Teachers no, academics ... well some of them.
This discussion is suffering from being about two things: High school education and post-secondary.
High school, and the teachers who are there, have vastly different problems which are associated more with difficulties in actually teaching.
Post-secondary troubles are more closely related to credentials and even validity (in the case of more questionable for profit groups). |
|
|
| atbell |
| quote: | Originally posted by The Potter
Also, what's with denying collective bargaining rights? Is the ability to freely associate not a fundamental right? If corporations can collectively lobby governments, then why can't teachers?
|
I think this needs to be pulled out on it's own.
I see collective bargaining rights as being one of the most important developments to come from the industrialization of the West. The right needs to be protected and I tend to side most with the firemen of Wisconsin who voiced support for teachers not because they had any direct losses but because they understood that the right to organized labour is an essencial balance in the economy.
Much like this discussion split between high school teachers and post-secondary issues, the discussions highlighted by the dispute in Wisconsin were fractured between tangible budget issues and valid "union busting" concerns about the errosion of labour rights.
From what I've seen the debate in Wisconsin has evloved to accept this, a positive sign for that state.
I can't help but wonder if the gov. was just going over the top as a tactic though. A little budgetary shock and awe. |
|
|
| atbell |
| quote: | Originally posted by Comrade Stalin
Education is certainly far more valuable than million dollar, one-time-use, cruise missiles. |
That can't be said enough. |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
You still have to pay for that firearm and ammunition with real money, right? You can't just walk into a gun store and demand a rifle and free ammo just because you have a constitutional right to own a gun. You are not exempt from paying for it. |
I'm all in favor of gun rights, but you can't go buy an education with the credit limit given to most college students. You can buy a gun and bullets with the credit limits that even the least-worthy credit card recipient can obtain. |
|
|
|
|
