Pages: 1 … 5 6 7

 

2010-12-09 09:20:46
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5746|London, England

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Well, if it's Social Darwinism you want...   Most of the world already offers that.
Please give me a logical explanation for why we should prop up those that continuously made poor choices in their life which led them to the bottom of the social ladder. Logic implies removing any emotional context.
To keep the peasants from getting restless....   If you want to see what living in a society with no social safety net is like, you can visit any given Third World country.  Kidnappings for ransom and murder are rather high in those environments.

The same would eventually develop here over enough time.  The underclass already is growing here even with social programs, so without them, we'd just expedite the process.
This country existed for 150 years without the 'safety nets'. I didn't see 'the underclass revolting'. If there is anything that should be taken away from 1984 it's that the revolt of the proletariat will never ever occur. People are too busy chasing their own self interests to ever bother forming into cohesive groups. Your fears are unfounded and baseless.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-12-09 09:21:10
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6793|North Carolina

dayarath wrote:

Well if you want to apply logic universally, why have 8 hour work days, free weekends and high paying salaries at all?
Damn government labor standards.
2010-12-09 09:22:33
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5746|London, England

dayarath wrote:

Well if you want to apply logic universally, why have 8 hour work days, free weekends and high paying salaries at all?
Because that is what people expect from their jobs. Supply and demand. Good luck filling a role at a company if you don't offer a competitive salary and competitive hours.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-12-09 09:27:08
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6793|North Carolina

JohnG@lt wrote:

This country existed for 150 years without the 'safety nets'. I didn't see 'the underclass revolting'. If there is anything that should be taken away from 1984 it's that the revolt of the proletariat will never ever occur. People are too busy chasing their own self interests to ever bother forming into cohesive groups. Your fears are unfounded and baseless.
Who said they would be organized?...  I'm not talking about the French Revolution here.

I'm saying that if you truly believe you're going to become wealthy, then social programs are in your best interests if you want to decrease the odds of being kidnapped or mugged.

This country also existed without public education for most of that time.  Should we return to that?
2010-12-09 09:32:09
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5746|London, England

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

This country existed for 150 years without the 'safety nets'. I didn't see 'the underclass revolting'. If there is anything that should be taken away from 1984 it's that the revolt of the proletariat will never ever occur. People are too busy chasing their own self interests to ever bother forming into cohesive groups. Your fears are unfounded and baseless.
Who said they would be organized?...  I'm not talking about the French Revolution here.

I'm saying that if you truly believe you're going to become wealthy, then social programs are in your best interests if you want to decrease the odds of being kidnapped or mugged.

This country also existed without public education for most of that time.  Should we return to that?
I don't see why not. Public education is nothing more than organized babysitting while the parents go off to work. I could do more teaching in a handful of hours than they would receive from a teacher in a public school in a week. Why? Because the teacher ultimately doesn't care about my kid. I have a vested interest in seeing them succeed.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-12-09 09:33:45
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6793|North Carolina

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

This country existed for 150 years without the 'safety nets'. I didn't see 'the underclass revolting'. If there is anything that should be taken away from 1984 it's that the revolt of the proletariat will never ever occur. People are too busy chasing their own self interests to ever bother forming into cohesive groups. Your fears are unfounded and baseless.
Who said they would be organized?...  I'm not talking about the French Revolution here.

I'm saying that if you truly believe you're going to become wealthy, then social programs are in your best interests if you want to decrease the odds of being kidnapped or mugged.

This country also existed without public education for most of that time.  Should we return to that?
I don't see why not. Public education is nothing more than organized babysitting while the parents go off to work. I could do more teaching in a handful of hours than they would receive from a teacher in a public school in a week. Why? Because the teacher ultimately doesn't care about my kid. I have a vested interest in seeing them succeed.
Ok then...  I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
2010-12-09 09:36:25
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6387|...
how are you going to find the time to work and educate your kid simultaneously
inane little opines
2010-12-09 09:37:50
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5746|London, England

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


Who said they would be organized?...  I'm not talking about the French Revolution here.

I'm saying that if you truly believe you're going to become wealthy, then social programs are in your best interests if you want to decrease the odds of being kidnapped or mugged.

This country also existed without public education for most of that time.  Should we return to that?
I don't see why not. Public education is nothing more than organized babysitting while the parents go off to work. I could do more teaching in a handful of hours than they would receive from a teacher in a public school in a week. Why? Because the teacher ultimately doesn't care about my kid. I have a vested interest in seeing them succeed.
Ok then...  I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
How much teaching would you say was done in the average 50 minute period in school? First ten minutes were reserved for getting the kids to sit down, take attendance etc. 10 minutes was spent teaching, and the following 30 minutes was spent answering questions from the gum chewer in the back of the classroom that didn't understand what was going on. Public school did more to stunt my education than it did to aid it.

Then there are the standardized tests and standardized education programs that ensure everyone comes out equally retarded, but at least they all have the same useless information memorized. Is it any wonder there has been a dearth of original thought in this country for the past fifty years?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-12-09 09:40:16
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5746|London, England

dayarath wrote:

how are you going to find the time to work and educate your kid simultaneously
I plan on sending my kids to school, if only to take advantage of the babysitting service paid for with my tax dollars. I plan on spending at least one hour with my kids every night helping with homework, improving on the lessons taught in school, and broadening their range intellectually instead of letting them rot on the simplistic public school curricula.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-12-09 09:43:59
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6387|...
I can't see public schooling as being a problem. If you have money there's private schools that supposedly offer better education.

Someone who's a professional will undoubtedly do a better job at teaching.

Last edited by dayarath (2010-12-09 09:44:25)

inane little opines
2010-12-09 09:44:21
11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5625|Cleveland, Ohio
why do people care that someone they dont know and have nothing to do with was arrested?
2010-12-09 09:45:09
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5746|London, England

dayarath wrote:

I can't see public schooling as being a problem. If you have money there's private schools that supposedly offer better education.

Someone who's a professional will undoubtedly do a better job at teaching.
That's just lolz.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-12-09 09:49:39
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6387|...

JohnG@lt wrote:

That's just lolz.
Besides maths and physics, perhaps economy can you teach your kid philosophy, chemistry, languages and all that jazz?

I know primary school teachers aren't much to talk about, highschool however are pretty decent. Atleast over here you need a university bachelor to teach in the first 3 classes of highschool for "smart kids", and a master's to do so in the last 3 - ofcourse in the relevant subjects.
inane little opines
2010-12-09 09:56:37
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6387|...

CNN wrote:

Dutch police arrest 16-year-old in connection with attacks on MasterCard and Visa websites, prosecutors say.
Haahaaa
inane little opines
2010-12-09 09:57:20
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5746|London, England

dayarath wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

That's just lolz.
Besides maths and physics, perhaps economy can you teach your kid philosophy, chemistry, languages and all that jazz?

I know primary school teachers aren't much to talk about, highschool however are pretty decent. Atleast over here you need a university bachelor to teach in the first 3 classes of highschool for "smart kids", and a master's to do so in the last 3 - ofcourse in the relevant subjects.
Yes. Outside of languages, there really isn't anything I couldn't teach better than what they would receive in school. Why? Because that teachers attention is split between 20-30 students. One on one time with a kid is vastly superior. Why do you think kids do better after receiving help from a tutor? The tutor can cater to the kids needs in ways the teacher is unable to.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-12-09 10:05:14
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6387|...

JohnG@lt wrote:

Yes. Outside of languages, there really isn't anything I couldn't teach better than what they would receive in school. Why? Because that teachers attention is split between 20-30 students. One on one time with a kid is vastly superior. Why do you think kids do better after receiving help from a tutor? The tutor can cater to the kids needs in ways the teacher is unable to.
I know that, I believe every parent would want to help their kid with school if they knew how to. I myself plan on doing so, too - as ofcourse you can expand on subjects you're familiar with easily.

However I don't see school as just a babysitting institution. It's good in teaching kids the basics. I know a guy who's studying maths and teaching highschool freshmen, and it's not all that easy bringing across the concept of negative numbers in a manner which 12 year olds can understand.

Besides that it's great for social interaction.
inane little opines
2010-12-09 11:25:48
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6793|North Carolina

dayarath wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

That's just lolz.
Besides maths and physics, perhaps economy can you teach your kid philosophy, chemistry, languages and all that jazz?

I know primary school teachers aren't much to talk about, highschool however are pretty decent. Atleast over here you need a university bachelor to teach in the first 3 classes of highschool for "smart kids", and a master's to do so in the last 3 - ofcourse in the relevant subjects.
Don't bother asking that.  John is apparently a master professor in addition to being an engineer and a future billionaire.
2010-12-09 11:31:11
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5746|London, England

Turquoise wrote:

dayarath wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

That's just lolz.
Besides maths and physics, perhaps economy can you teach your kid philosophy, chemistry, languages and all that jazz?

I know primary school teachers aren't much to talk about, highschool however are pretty decent. Atleast over here you need a university bachelor to teach in the first 3 classes of highschool for "smart kids", and a master's to do so in the last 3 - ofcourse in the relevant subjects.
Don't bother asking that.  John is apparently a master professor in addition to being an engineer and a future billionaire.
How many teachers do you know? I'm friends with a healthy dozen and maybe one is someone I'd trust with my kids education.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-12-09 11:32:09
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6793|North Carolina

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

dayarath wrote:


Besides maths and physics, perhaps economy can you teach your kid philosophy, chemistry, languages and all that jazz?

I know primary school teachers aren't much to talk about, highschool however are pretty decent. Atleast over here you need a university bachelor to teach in the first 3 classes of highschool for "smart kids", and a master's to do so in the last 3 - ofcourse in the relevant subjects.
Don't bother asking that.  John is apparently a master professor in addition to being an engineer and a future billionaire.
How many teachers do you know? I'm friends with a healthy dozen and maybe one is someone I'd trust with my kids education.
They must not be close friends if you wouldn't trust your children with them.
2010-12-09 13:23:20
manevs
Member
+1|5277

JohnG@lt wrote:

I don't see why not. Public education is nothing more than organized babysitting while the parents go off to work. I could do more teaching in a handful of hours than they would receive from a teacher in a public school in a week. Why? Because the teacher ultimately doesn't care about my kid. I have a vested interest in seeing them succeed.
Of course, school will teach them a wider variety of skills, and types of knowledge you wouldn't be able to provide them with. There's also a social aspect to it.
2010-12-09 14:04:51
DrunkFace
Germans did 911
+427|7069|Disaster Free Zone

JohnG@lt wrote:

How much teaching would you say was done in the average 50 minute period in school? First ten minutes were reserved for getting the kids to sit down, take attendance etc. 10 minutes was spent teaching, and the following 30 minutes was spent answering questions from the gum chewer in the back of the classroom that didn't understand what was going on. Public school did more to stunt my education than it did to aid it.

Then there are the standardized tests and standardized education programs that ensure everyone comes out equally retarded, but at least they all have the same useless information memorized. Is it any wonder there has been a dearth of original thought in this country for the past fifty years?
Yours and my schooling seems vastly different.

Mind you, in half the classes I spent playing cards or having pointless arguments with people about how many sides a line has, stealing the teachers chalk and dusters, watching videos... or porn. But in amongst all that I feel I got a fairly decent education. Of course it could have been done much more efficiently, but fuck I was a kid and study with no enjoyment is just as useless as doing nothing. I know for a fact I learnt more in classes where we were able to muck up and have a laugh, then in the ones with teachers who for lack of a better word were bitches.
2010-12-09 14:05:41
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5746|London, England

manevs wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

I don't see why not. Public education is nothing more than organized babysitting while the parents go off to work. I could do more teaching in a handful of hours than they would receive from a teacher in a public school in a week. Why? Because the teacher ultimately doesn't care about my kid. I have a vested interest in seeing them succeed.
Of course, school will teach them a wider variety of skills, and types of knowledge you wouldn't be able to provide them with. There's also a social aspect to it.
How do you figure? I actually paid attention in class and have probably put more effort into a myriad of subjects than most teachers have. I'm not going to sit there and have them write term papers for me, but to say that I'll be less effective than a teacher simply because they have a certificate is complete bollocks. Right now, today, I could teach any college level history course with ease. I could do the same for high school science and math classes with no issues whatsoever. English I'll leave up to my future wife.

But to say that teachers have some special knowledge is just ludicrous. 99% of them teach out of a text book and have no deeper knowledge than that book contains.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-12-09 15:24:13
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,820|6494|eXtreme to the maX

Kmar wrote:

Your optimism is not seated in reality. There is very little revealed in the way of breaking news. What we have here is a few semi-embarrased diplomats. The drama that surrounds this story is not really in the content of the leaks, but rather what is going to happen to the leakers. The admiration of Assagne is based on his defiance of a world.power. That is the only thing that makes this story remotely interesting. Geopolitical treachery is so 2001.
In this case no, however if every leader knows raw intel and internal communications can be leaked at any time they will have to think harder before lying to the public.
Fuck Israel
2010-12-09 15:28:31
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5746|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:

Kmar wrote:

Your optimism is not seated in reality. There is very little revealed in the way of breaking news. What we have here is a few semi-embarrased diplomats. The drama that surrounds this story is not really in the content of the leaks, but rather what is going to happen to the leakers. The admiration of Assagne is based on his defiance of a world.power. That is the only thing that makes this story remotely interesting. Geopolitical treachery is so 2001.
In this case no, however if every leader knows raw intel and internal communications can be leaked at any time they will have to think harder before lying to the public.
Or more likely, spend more effort covering their tracks
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

 

Pages: 1 … 5 6 7

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard