Public Education is a Socialist Monopoly

[Kid Eager]

I just don't get this thread: if education were a socialist monopoly why is that such a bad thing (as opposed to a religious, capitalist, anarchist, militarist, separatist, FMOTList or some other sort of monopoly)?

 

[JonathanQuick]

/// Having your views challenged is not considered unfriendly nor uncivil.

Emphasis added.

1. Having your words misquoted, intentionally taken out of context, and otherwise misused is clearly "unfriendly" and "uncivil."

2. Being directly OR indirectly called "stupid" and "ignorant" and countless other demeaning pejoratives IS "unfriendly" AND "uncivil."

3. Being attacked by hordes of intolerant people with a hard left-wing ax to grind IS "unfriendly" AND "uncivil," particularly when the very SUBTITLE of the forum is discussing "skepticism".

If it isn't YOUR "skepticism," it's beneath ignorance, isn't it, oh Grey One.

Not one of you had a professor in any classroom repeatedly condemn your "ignorance," your "stupidity," and harass and mock you as so many of you have done to others so often.

In another thread, 154 is ridiculed as a "Bible-humping moron."

Clever, no?

Friendly?

Civil?

Only in your perverted universe. Only in yours.

And NOT ONE OF YOU had the guts, the decency, to stand up to the vile author of this "Bible-humping moron" crap.

What cowards these men be.

 

[JonathanQuick]

Pointing out that someone is using a logical fallacy on a forum for skepticism is hardly off topic.

Have any of your PALS ever used a "logical fallacy" in this forum that you let slip by? Ever?

I'm just recalling the "friendly and lively way" one *member* here responded to 154 in a thread titled Jesus Christ.

Get ready for Randian "friendliness". Here it is:

154 is a "Bible-humping moron" said Achan Hinidrane.

"What's that Bible-humping moron, 154, going to blather on about this time?"

That and....

"The self-righteous always get nailed in the end."

There's no "logical fallacy" in that "friendly and lively" comment, is there jj.

No Fallacy of the Ad Hominem.

Nothing in "Bible-humping moron" but pure scholarship and good will, right jj?

Incidentally, the "moderators" are true *intellectuals* to permit "Bible-humping moron" while clipping their
toenails and moving this post and that to their "PROPER" locations.

 

[cyborg]

I just don't get this thread: if education were a socialist monopoly why is that such a bad thing (as opposed to a religious, capitalist, anarchist, militarist, separatist, FMOTList or some other sort of monopoly)?

American political debate is apparently now framed by the most insane.

Well, I say now, but I'm not sure there's any evidence that hasn't always been the case.

 

[Travis]

I wonder how losing tenure, teachers unions and the implementation of vouchers would help the average student in...say Oakland, California?

 

[Craig4]

Craig, my "weak game" was quoting the late professor emeritus Milton Friedman, Nobel Laureate, and Albert Shanker,former teachers' union boss.

Now if YOU think THEIR "games" are "weak," you should say so. I will stand by the brilliance of Professor Friedman. He frequently agreed with the union boss, and said yes indeed, his job is to represent teachers, and not kids.

This is a very damning indictment of teachers, but it is well-deserved nonetheless.

On to your next comments:



Whether you haven't bothered to read what has been posted, or you have intentionally misstated the facts, either way you are being bothersome and subtracting from the sum total of human knowledge. I do not have time to banter with people who posit such nonsense as you are doing.

I have suggested:

1. Eliminating tenure, on the basis of a distinguished physics professor and personal friend

2. Providing vouchers, so the poorer class can enjoy SOME choice, as the Clintons and Gores and Obamas have enjoyed with their children, and I might add, as many public school teachers enjoy for their kids.

3. Getting rid of incompetent teachers.

4. Getting rid of teachers' unions.

5. Ridding public education of its extreme left-wing bias. It's sickening. It's stifling. It's extremely well documented.

Those are for starters.

Now, please, stop lying.




Why don't you write for ten minutes on the most complex subject in your considerable repertoire.

I have often made such a challenge to others as condescending as you but I cannot recall a single one of them taking up the challenge. Not one.

Go, fish.

You quote mined Freidman, he never advocated the things you're talking about. Your understanding of educational problems has about he depth of a bumper sticker, gee that's helpful. You can't get rid of teacher's Unions. You're bumping into the Right of Assembly there. They have a right to form unions. Of course in other threads you seem ready to betray the US Constitution and force other kids to learn your fairy story so throwing out the rest of the document doesn't seem like much of a stretch for you.

Vouchers are still socialist so not sure why that would help with your socialist objections.

 

[Craig4]

I wonder how losing tenure, teachers unions and the implementation of vouchers would help the average student in...say Oakland, California?

http://www.insidebayarea.com/crime-courts/ci_16330511?source=rss


According to the study in the cited article sixteen of Oakland's schools have one year turnover rates of 20 percent. These schools are underperforming. I would say we can eliminate tenured teachers as a possible cause for their poor performance.

 

[Chaos]

1. Having your words misquoted, intentionally taken out of context, and otherwise misused is clearly "unfriendly" and "uncivil."

2. Being directly OR indirectly called "stupid" and "ignorant" and countless other demeaning pejoratives IS "unfriendly" AND "uncivil."

3. Being attacked by hordes of intolerant people with a hard left-wing ax to grind IS "unfriendly" AND "uncivil," particularly when the very SUBTITLE of the forum is discussing "skepticism".

Having to endure repeated raving fact-free rants by someone with a hard right-wing ax to grind and no clue about reality outside what his propaganda tells him isn´t exactly conducive to civil discussion.

Present a rational argument, and we´ll treat you as if you presented a rational argument. Keep dishing out biased ideological drivel, and we´ll treat you as if you presented biased ideological drivel. It´s that simple...

If it isn't YOUR "skepticism," it's beneath ignorance, isn't it, oh Grey One.

Not one of you had a professor in any classroom repeatedly condemn your "ignorance," your "stupidity," and harass and mock you as so many of you have done to others so often.

Perhaps that´s because we don´t display the same degree of ignorance as certain people do?

 

[Craig4]

I frankly think this has more to do with the fact his kids have to learn real science in public schools. With vouchers they could go to a Biblical Literalist school and learn fairy tale biology. It's a national embarrassment for the US that in the year 2010 we're engaging in a discussion about whether or not to tell biology students that two nudist dolts were the first humans.

 

[Paradox74]

I frankly think this has more to do with the fact his kids have to learn real science in public schools. With vouchers they could go to a Biblical Literalist school and learn fairy tale biology. It's a national embarrassment for the US that in the year 2010 we're engaging in a discussion about whether or not to tell biology students that two nudist dolts were the first humans.

Ok, you're not helping this conversation. Mr Quick is not a YEC!

 

[Travis]

http://www.insidebayarea.com/crime-courts/ci_16330511?source=rss


According to the study in the cited article sixteen of Oakland's schools have one year turnover rates of 20 percent. These schools are underperforming. I would say we can eliminate tenured teachers as a possible cause for their poor performance.

And can you imagine sixteen whole schools worth of students suddenly having to relocate to other schools?

Schools can't just expand overnight and there needs to be a certain level of accessibility especially someplace where the family might not even own a car.

 

[Craig4]

Ok, you're not helping this conversation. Mr Quick is not a YEC!

Reading his rants on evolution related forums I do not believe his claim on this point.

 

[Twiler]

1. Having your words misquoted, intentionally taken out of context, and otherwise misused is clearly "unfriendly" and "uncivil."

2. Being directly OR indirectly called "stupid" and "ignorant" and countless other demeaning pejoratives IS "unfriendly" AND "uncivil."

3. Being attacked by hordes of intolerant people with a hard left-wing ax to grind IS "unfriendly" AND "uncivil," particularly when the very SUBTITLE of the forum is discussing "skepticism".

If it isn't YOUR "skepticism," it's beneath ignorance, isn't it, oh Grey One.

Not one of you had a professor in any classroom repeatedly condemn your "ignorance," your "stupidity," and harass and mock you as so many of you have done to others so often.

In another thread, 154 is ridiculed as a "Bible-humping moron."

Clever, no?

Friendly?

Civil?

Only in your perverted universe. Only in yours.
And NOT ONE OF YOU had the guts, the decency, to stand up to the vile author of this "Bible-humping moron" crap.

What cowards these men be.

I think this pretty much sums up your position. You can't bear that the universe is other than what you want it to be, so you blame it all on an vaguely defined group of people who are different to you. And you prefer the past to the present because it's easier to interpret in the way you want.

I am a socialist, I am an atheist, I would have voted for Obama if I lived in the US, I support women's rights to abort their potential children. I have all these characteristics, I exist, I am real, and you can't hurt me or change me.

 

[bikerdruid]

what the heck is a YEC?

 

[Mirrorglass]

what the heck is a YEC?

A Young Earth Creationist.

 

[fuelair]

A Young Earth Creationist.

aka: incompetant fool. *













*i.e.: a person who is under the impression that actual scientific study and interpretation of evidence is massively overwhelmed by reading a book about a mythological being in the 3,957th or so child's story of how the earth came to be and how we showed up afterward.

 

[bikerdruid]

sooo........
since i'm on jq's ignore list, i can't ask him.
i have read his opinions on several topics.
among his views, does any one know if he is a creationist too?, or more to the point, a YEC?
i do find it astounding that, in one of the most influential and prosperous nations on the planet, seemingly rational people can blithely discard modern science and adhere to the myths of an ancient goat-herding nomadic tribe. (and apparently almost half of americans fit this anamoly...)
it really is rather mind-boggling.

 

[JonathanQuick]

aka: incompetant fool. *

Precious. Anti-brilliant, in fact!

Fuelair is in extremely good company here - I mean except for me and perhaps a few others.

"Incompetants" (SIC) everywhere, many of them either teaching kids, or else carrying water for those teachers (SIC).

 

[Mirrorglass]

Look, an honest, inquiring response. Why are comments like yours so very rare here?

They aren't.

Why is it that most remarks are as snarky, as ignorant, as biased as they can be? Can you answer me that please?
And why are decent people, like you, afraid to challenge the snarky, asinine comments of chimpanzees?

That's because you are very rude, you constantly label people as 'leftists' and 'liberals', along with other words, without any information that suggests such labels are accurate. It's because most of your posts contain more insults than debate. It's because when someone points out a piece of information you've provided is wrong, you attack them and ignore their point. It's because you point out spelling errors constantly - this is ridiculously bad manners. In everyday conversation, do you make a huge fuss about it every time your partner stutters or mispronounces a word? How do they usually respond? And several other acts of rudeness you repeatedly do. You talk to people with contempt. It's only natural that they respond in kind.

I repeat, a very good friend, and distinguished teacher, told me the MOST IMPORTANT thing that should be done to improve public education is to eliminate tenure.

It really does not matter who you heard the idea from. The question is, would the idea work?

This will strike a note of fear down the backs of all incompetent teachers. The rest should not worry.

I have a hard time believing that striking fear into people is a good way to make them do a better job. Do you have any data that suggests your plan would have the desired effect?

Milton Friedman worked tirelessly to promote school choice - something teachers' unions are completely opposed to, and for the most selfish, most obvious of reasons. Unions don't care about the kids, only about getting more dues. Albert Shanker said as much decades ago.

Someone may have said it, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily true. You will have to provide more than a single quote if you are to prove teacher's unions truly don't care about students. My own experiences, at least, are completely contrary to this.

Get rid of unions, get rid of incompetent teachers, and stop conducting classrooms in such an extremist, left-wing fashion.

I don't think any classrooms are conducted in an "extremist, left-wing fashion". I also think you need to define the terms better. Do you think sexual education and multiculturality are left-wing values that should be cast aside? Are the other such values?

Promoting homosexuality and multicultural nonsense have displaced too much reading, writing, and arithmetic.

Do you have evidence of this? Where is homosexuality promoted, and how many hours of other classes has it replaced?

Moreover, what do you mean by multicultural nonsense? Do you believe children should not learn about other cultures, or is your problem with the idea that other cultures should be respected?

Parents should be teaching their kids the values they wish.

Does this not happen today? I do not believe this has anything to do with schools.

Or do you mean that the schools shouldn't teach values? Does that mean you are also against teaching religion in school?

I would settle on just these things for starters.

You will need to be a bit more specific. Which parts, specifically, of the current curriculum do you want removed, and what will they be replaced by?

Chimps, out of the classroom. You just disrupt and fling poo.

Who do you refer to by "chimps"? Less-talented children?

 

[JonathanQuick]

You quote mined Freidman, (SIC) he never advocated the things you're talking about. (RUN-ON SENTENCE. PLEASE LEARN HOW TO SPELL, AND HOW TO WRITE SENTENCES.) Your understanding of educational problems has about he (SIC) depth of a bumper sticker, gee that's helpful. (RUN-ON SENTENCE NUMBER TWO, OF TWO. YOU'RE 100% SO FAR.) You can't get rid of teacher's Unions. (SIC) You're bumping into the Right (SIC) of Assembly (SIC) there. They have a right to form unions. Of course in other threads you seem ready to betray the US Constitution and force other kids to learn your fairy story so throwing out the rest of the document doesn't seem like much of a stretch for you.

Vouchers are still socialist so not sure why that would help with your socialist objections.

"Drawing on my fine command of the English language, I said nothing." - Robert Benchley

This quote by Robert Benchley is not applicable to you, alas, because Benchley did indeed have a fine command of the English language.

Signature page of the United States Constitution:

"Attest William Jackson Secretary

done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,