I'm with ya Haven! I love Marx's ideas, even if my friends call me a Communist because of it. ------------------
Gee, I could've sworn Democrats controlled both the House and Senate during the Reagan years--they approved whatever defense spending was passed. Back on topic, McCain will do whatever gets him the most pub.
shanna -- our arguments fall along party lines...i've heard the responses all before...it's just funny that the facts are so different from one side to the other. I simply don't have enough time to respond to all this...I'll try later. BUT: as for energy prices around the globe...who the hell cares!!!??? Energy prices in NY are more expensive than TX..know why??? TAXES!!!! They have state and local taxes on their gasoline that make it far more expensive to buy a gallon of gas there than here...the same is true of Europe. They tax the hell out of everything. As for whoever tried to compare the economies of industrialized socialist nations of Europe to the US...there is no comparison. Our productivity and economic health are far stronger than those nations. There's really no comparison, and that fact is usually acknowledged even by liberal democrats. As for Marx...let's just say we'll agree to disagree. I like Walt Disney's fantastic visions of the future too...it doesn't mean I believe they're attainable or that the cost to get there is worth it. I choose not to be taken care of by my government..I'd rather do it myself, thanks. ------------------
TheFreak: 1. Actually, the Republicans controlled the Senate for part of Reagan's term. 2. Reagan was an exceptionally strong President and had the advantage of the Cold War. If someone disagreed with him, he simply branded them soft on Communism. Reagan's influence with the public was very rare among Presidents. He got what he wanted. I think the best sign that it would have been different under a Democrat is that as soon as Clinton was elected, defense spending went DOWN. MadMax: Jeez! You equivocate liking Marx to being in favor of socialist Utopianism... not true at all! And certain very liberal European countries DO have living standards as high as that in the US. If you look at GDP, well... no, but if you look at quality of life and per capita purchasing power... you get some very good equivalencies with FAR fewer resources (and I stress the resources). ------------------ A few years back on the Senate floor... Phil Gramm: "If Democrats could, they'd tax the air we breathe." Ted Kennedy (jumping up): "By God, why didn't I think of that sooner!" Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001 [This message has been edited by haven (edited June 04, 2001).]
Achebe: Ouch! What happened to your own delusional signature-- the one about fish and women?! What I meant to say was that in discourse, liberals are much more intolerant of conservatives than vice-versa. Hey, I've been both. Have you? Remember, this is for fun... and edification. shanna: I don't know if hell has "broken out" in our public schools but it sure seems like evil has "crept in" since God was wrongly expelled from the public school. haven: I'm headed to the library. ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
Crime in school as been steadily declining for the last decade or so. And God wasn't expelled from school. You've been corrected on this many times, I guess the conservative propaganda has been too embeddened in your head for you to get this simple fact through it. ------------------ www.swirve.com "Pre-born, you're fine, pre-school, you're f*****."-George Carlin
Rocketman95: extending your logic: Ecstasy, pot and guns are in school too. They're in there, just not officially (remember what you said about the "higher-ups")... which is what this part of the WHOLE discussion is about-- the legitimate presence of God in the conducting of our public educational system. haven: You have interested me in reading Marx. He probably has been distorted by history and the associated with Communism. Achebe: have a good lunch. Say hey to sweetie for me... ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils. [This message has been edited by RichRocket (edited June 04, 2001).]
Rich: I asked both my mom and my dad these questions because I was curious. My mom and dad spent a combined 70 years in HISD. My mom still consults with the district's guidance counselors on cirriculum and crisis management. My father is conservative and my mother is liberal. Here's the synopsis of what I heard... Are public schools more out of control than ever? Not really. Kids are more out of control than ever. The schools herd them in and out and security is actually much, MUCH more prevalent in schools today than it ever was. My mom said that, in fact, they had far more problems in secondary (high schools) schools in the early and mid 80's than they do today because of the increased presence of law enforcement. My father agreed that schools are not nearly as dangerous, but kids are more dangerous outside of the school environment which makes it more tense in the schools. They both agree the reason for this is lack of parental involvement and exceedingly impoverished conditions. Kids are bombarded on a daily basis with drug dealers, drugs, guns, gangs and the like because of impoverished conditions in the communities. My mom, who has worked with the district's gang task force, strongly believes gangs are the result of lack of a stable home life. The kids are looking for a family and gangs provide that even if it is an unhealthy one. Why are teachers leaving in droves? This answer was resounding from both of my parents: money! Teacher pay is completely out of line with that of private business. It is increasingly difficult to get raises and teacher unions sympathize with taxpayers more often than with their membership. Teachers are leaving because they cannot afford to stay. Why are they having a hard time finding qualified Administrators? This time, I got two different but interesting answers. My father believes that lack of promoting from within is a serious problem in the district. Administrators are often not teachers. They are not hired from within creating problems of animosity between teachers and administrators. The result is an often uncomfortable situation. He also thinks that administrators, more often than not, lack the proper skills to manage teachers because they do not understand the classroom. They work with budgets, numbers and paperwork but don't really get teaching. As a result, the district is faced with the prospect of regularly having to hire new administrators because old one's are run off. My mom believes that the district is too heavily engrossed in politics for its own good. Their hiring practices are based as much on who is in favor as who is best qualified. Not terribly surprising. They both agree that administrators, although they make considerably more than teachers, don't make the kind of money that even middle managers in major corporations do. Again, the lack of pay moves administrators into private industry and out of public realm. Why do we have to change the grading scale? According to both my parents, the grading scale hasn't been adjusted in 25 years when a passing grade was lowered to 70 from 72. In fact, students were being held back MORE often 10 to 15 years ago than they are now, but it has less to do with lenient grades and more to do with testing requirements. My father spent more class time over the past 5 years quizzing students on potential TAAS questions than he did teaching reading, math and science. Why? Because principals are being held directly accountable for the TAAS scores of the students under them. TAAS scores have steadily increased as class time training the taking of the test has increased. My mother spent years teaching kids how to take the SAT and ACT. She is still a consultant for ACT and works with teachers and counselors on administering the test. She said that she has never seen the amount of cirriculum dedicated to teaching how to take the TAAS given to ANY other subject. At least 3 hours every day are dedicated to teaching the TAAS in most secondary schools. Bottom line is that the problems in school are complex and multi-faceted. In some instances, there is extreme overreaching on the part of government to regulate schools. On the other hand, there are cases of too little involvement in public schools by the public at large. As for danger, my parents think it is far more dangerous outside the schools than inside. ------------------ The internet is about the free exchange and sale of other people's ideas. - Futurama
Jeff: we thank your for the quick research. I spent 7 years in the classroom myself-- ending 15 years ago. Two things I would reassert: 1. Nowhere is there more likely to be danger than a place where security is necessary. Therefore, I don't see how anyone can consider schools to be safer today than in years past. Maybe they seem safer because of the security precautions. There is also a huge disparity between schools. Some are well-run and are very safe while some are like war zones. 2. When I spoke of grade inflation, I was particularly referring to standardized tests. I don't live in Texas, so I'm not familiar with TAAS. In my state, it was recently uncovered that the passing mark for the end-of-fifth-grade math test was just reduced to 28% from 43%. Imagine, 28% as a passing grade! I know they've had similar adjustments over the years in the SAT etc. ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
Security was introduced into the schools about 20 years ago in most urban areas. The growth of security in schools was the direct result of the increase in gang activity. Since security was added, crime rates in schools have dropped. As for testing, there are no "standards" for passing and failing scholastic exams like the ACT or SAT. They are simply tests that determine placement or acceptance into specific universities and academic programs. As far as I know, the requirement for entrance into UT has been either top quarter of your class or 1100 on the SAT since I went there in 1987. It wasnt' my SAT's that got me in! Colleges have their own reasons for increasing or decreasing academic standards, but my mom doesn't recall a time in recent memory when there was an across-the-board change in collegiate academic standards. The last change she or my father remember in secondary education in Texas was the addition of No Pass No Play back in the 80's by Ross Perot. Teachers and counselors HATED this because of the dramatic addition of paperwork to their already hectic schedules. ------------------ The internet is about the free exchange and sale of other people's ideas. - Futurama [This message has been edited by Jeff (edited June 04, 2001).]
Hmmmm... no. The masses are conservative and one tends to find an intolerant conservative faster than an intolerant liberal. BTW, I'm confident that if the masses had more time to read, ponder existence, etc. there would be more liberals. Hard working people don't have time to question their existence as pawns in a commercially organized society though, so I understand why there's a predominance of conservatives. ------------------ You're a fine woman, why don't you mock that draft up [This message has been edited by Achebe (edited June 04, 2001).]
Crime in schools is down?! Beware of statistics. I never felt unsafe in my public school in the 70's. Tell me kids today feel that way. Where can you find God in a public school? Tell me. Rocketman95: Why must you resort to insults? I think I know why. Achebe: If the "masses are conservative" how and why did first Clinton then Gore win the popular election? ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils. [This message has been edited by RichRocket (edited June 04, 2001).]
Speaking as someone that graduated in 99, I felt safe at my school. ------------------ They're loud, they're obnoxious and proud, They are conscious but don't forget that theeeey're your future, These kids are accused for all the violence, You can't even keep them silent, You...thought you had...all the answers...
Two reasons: 1) Exactly. Clinton and Gore ran on a centrist platform. 2) You still have to play the game. ------------------ You're a fine woman, why don't you mock that draft up
BGM, of course some kids feel safe but are you denying that the public schools are more out of control than ever? Why, then, are teachers leaving in droves? Why are they having a hard time finding qualified Administrators? Why do we have to change the grading scale to keep test scores up? We are kidding ourselves. Achebe: are you saying that Democratic centrist equals uninformed ignorami? ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils. [This message has been edited by RichRocket (edited June 04, 2001).]
RichRocket: Headed to the library for what? I'm at one... if you really want to know something I can look it up ! On safety in schools: I've always felt safe at my school. yeah, there was violence there, but I always felt confident with a "live and let live" policy. On general tolerance: judging from call in radio shows, I'd say liberals are more tolerant. Conservative callers seem much more insulting. I actually think it depends on toleration of *what*. Generally, liberals utterly detest two stereotypes. One is the "redneck" (different names in different part s of the country). They dislike the ignorant, slovenly, bible-belt conservative who barely graduated high school and can't think beyond himself. They also hate the "evil corporate businessman" stereotype, which DREAMer mentioned the other day. Conservatives hate two stereotypes of liberals as well, as far as I can tell. One of them is the head-in-the-clounds intellectual (or hippy) who doesn't know anything about "reality" but is eager to give away other people's money for some obscure ideal of "justice." The other stereotype is the deadbeat. The person who is a Democrat so he can get a larger welfare check every month. I don't hate many conservatives that I know. I do hate those stereotypes. All in all, I think liberals have more open anger, while conservatives are more quietly condescending. I *hate* it when conservatives treat my ideas like "well, you're young and sheltered, when you've had a dose of the real world and Uncle Sam taking your money you'll be one of us." That drives me crazy, because it dismisses my ideas, arguments and beliefs without even considering their merit. People on this board have done this, and it drives me crazy! ------------------ A few years back on the Senate floor... Phil Gramm: "If Democrats could, they'd tax the air we breathe." Ted Kennedy (jumping up): "By God, why didn't I think of that sooner!" Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001
I graduated in 1995, and I never felt unsafe. We also had prayer before my basketball games, before the football games, morning prayer services at the flagpoles, at pep rallys, and at our graduation. That's a lot of God in our school. Please tell me why you think I resort to insults. For one thing, it wasn't much of an insult, I'm just sick and tired of conservatives throwing out the bullsh!t that God is not allowed in school, it is. It just can't be promoted by the higher ups. ------------------ www.swirve.com "Pre-born, you're fine, pre-school, you're f*****."-George Carlin
$RichyRocket$, I won't be able to play this game much longer(lunch date w/ the wife), but I didn't mean to suggest that the Centrist Democratic platform is filled w/ idiots. I tend to find myself somewhere closer to a Centrist than to a Liberal (pragmatic effects of having to actually work for food). I merely meant to say that Clinton/Gore was a little bit easier for the country to digest than say Tsongas, etc. ------------------ You're a fine woman, why don't you mock that draft up
But wasn't Tsongas hugely popular before the whole cancer thing? ------------------ www.swirve.com "Pre-born, you're fine, pre-school, you're f*****."-George Carlin
If, however, I can "successfully" assert that the cutoff for passing the SAT is 1000, then the score has some absolute meaning not just a relative meaning. That's what happened here. They lowered the standardized end-of-grade passing score from an already-miserable 43% to a deplorable 28%. Why? To legitimize social promotion, I guess. ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
