User Tag List

View Poll Results: Which support system for your post privatised school?

Voters
34. You may not vote on this poll
  • Charity

    3 8.82%
  • Corporate

    10 29.41%
  • Religious

    7 20.59%
  • I don't know/I love government control of education

    14 41.18%
First 6141516

Results 151 to 157 of 157

  1. #151
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Using tax money to pay for people's college education would be an example of making things less competitive. It evens the bar and gives more people a chance to get educated and thus succeed.
    Except the fallacy here is that college educations have positive externalities and improve living standards as a whole, and thus should be subsidized.
    I am an ENTJ. I hate political correctness but love smart people ^_^

  2. #152
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IlyaK1986 View Post
    Except the fallacy here is that college educations have positive externalities and improve living standards as a whole, and thus should be subsidized.
    Wait are you really saying a college education doesn't improve living standards? A college grad earns something like 20k more than someone with only a high school education. Am I reading you wrong?

  3. #153
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post

    Here's the big thing: Most people aren't on the economic top and never will be, so it's in most people's interest to get the people on the top to give up some of their cake.


    You sound like you would have liked feudalism. Or anarchy.
    Exactly what is wrong.

    I prefer a system run by free markets and meritocracy, a system in which those who are incapable are not put on artificial support but just left to fend for themselves, and find themselves done away with in short order.

    Sometimes it amazes me how much compassion trumps our utilitarianism, when in reality everyone will be much better off when those that take from the system more than they produce are gone.

    Standards of living are a zero-sum game. Something is not created from nothing, thus resources should be put to their best use, which is why I am fundamentally against any first world aid to disease-ridden financial black hole nations and why I support keeping American resources within America and Israel (for their inventions, and to burn away the parasites of the Earth).

    Think about it. Is the quickest way to end poverty to keep throwing money away day after day to feed the homeless?

    No, there indeed is a much, much faster way to end poverty, and that is the simple and efficient procedure of letting everyone live as they can (or can't) afford to.
    I am an ENTJ. I hate political correctness but love smart people ^_^

  4. #154
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Wait are you really saying a college education doesn't improve living standards? A college grad earns something like 20k more than someone with only a high school education. Am I reading you wrong?
    Yes, you are. What I meant was saying that funding colleges making the system less competitive is a fallacy.

    Colleges carry positive externalities. So they should be subsidized.
    I am an ENTJ. I hate political correctness but love smart people ^_^

  5. #155
    Senior Member reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Factors like race and economic class should explored because there are very real disparages between minority and lower-income education and middle class white education (of course not every black person receives a poor education, but from a sociological and demographic standpoint, race, culture, and income must be explored)
    Race can be explored but it should have nothing to do with policy, since race is an incidental variable.

    Perhaps an all black school should be treated different than an all white school, because as you said, culture is relevant, and different races tend to have different cultures.
    The culture is relevent, but race isn't. The fact that people of different races tend to have a similar culture is nothing but an accident of history and migration patterns, and should not be important when forming policy decisions. There have been times and places where white people have had cultural norms and attitudes which have corresponded to those of "black culture" in the US today, such as the Irish and Scottish of a the 18th and 19th century. In fact, it is no accident that "black culture" in the US arose where those peoples emigrated to in the US, since they effectively adopted the culture of the Irish and Scottish who they mixed with.

    While I think race should be relevant with this issue, I believe economic class is more relevant. Maybe a low-income school will benefit from would benefit more from things like free breakfasts more than a white upper-class school district.
    The term "economic class" doesn't make much sense, but I suppose you must mean something more like 'monetary wealth class'. Again, race is an irrelevent factor. Here is a tip: cut the word 'race' out of the discussion, or pretend that everyone is white or black or orange or green or whatever. Then you can get on and have a serious discussion about the cost and quality of education in the US.
    A criticism that can be brought against everything ought not to be brought against anything.

  6. #156
    Senior Member reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Here's the big thing: Most people aren't on the economic top and never will be, so it's in most people's interest to get the people on the top to give up some of their cake. It's funny that most of the best places to live have progressive taxation.
    That would be a huge thing, but it isn't true. This mistake even has a name within the field of economics, the zero-sum fallacy. In fact, if I thought that you were right about this then I would be against any free-market, since this would imply that anyone who acquires any wealth can do so only at the expense of someone else i.e. profits would be theft. However, the zero-sum fallacy is just that, a fallacy. Indeed, life on earth would be impossible if it wasn't a fallacy, and so I have no problem with profits, since they add to the total wealth available without taking anything from anyone. The idea that the wealth of the lowest earners can only increase if we steal and share out the wealth of the highest earners is simply false, and there is a huge body of literature on the matter for anyone interested in finding out more.

    Edit: On another note, many people who are the lowest earners today will be higher earners before they retire. It is no coincidence that those in the lowest income brackets also tend to be young people who have only just started or have yet to begin their careers. The "classes" are not static and their members are continually changing, as should be expected be in a free economy with or without "progressive taxation" (infact, I would expect less movement between "classes" in places where there is "progressive taxation", since people who are given something for nothing will have little incentive to invest the time and effort to become a bigger earner, and "progressive taxation" has a nasty habit creating a dependent underclass, despite the intentions of those who advocate it).

    In any case, the term "progressive taxation" assumes that which is under debate i.e. whether there is any progress made through "progressive taxation". Most of the time, I think not. In fact, half of that which passes for "progressive taxation" seems to me to be anything but, often a transfer of wealth away from those who have least to those who have the most, since it is the latter who successfully pull the right political levers to get their way.
    A criticism that can be brought against everything ought not to be brought against anything.

  7. #157
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by murkrow View Post
    Possibly the greatest tool on control and force of stagnation present in today's society is the public education system and the state control over curriculum.

    If education were to be privatized would you prefer to enroll your child in a school supported by charity, a corporation or a religious group?

    This is of course assuming you lack the resources to have your child attend a purely tuition supported school.
    This isn't an easy question. There are a lot of problems with public education, but each of the alternatives also present problems.

    Charity: Too little funding, lower quality.

    Corporate: High standards for entry, may specialize students and not offer opportunities to learn other trades.

    Religious: Potential for indoctrination, requires nominal faith in religion.

    If I had to go with one, I'd say corporate. It seems like it would fix more of the problems with education than the others. It would at least prepare the students for what a part of the job market was looking for. A lot of things about current schools are ineffective to the point that some people would have been just as well off getting a job instead of even attending school.

    I'm not sure whether we should keep our current system and try to improve it instead, or whether this would work better... but I can see advantages in this corporate idea given the current state of many public schools.

Similar Threads

  1. Math Education: An Inconvenient Truth
    By nightning in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-13-2009, 11:19 PM
  2. late bloomers @ formal education
    By Grayscale in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11-01-2008, 11:17 AM
  3. reforming math education
    By Gabe in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 08-15-2008, 12:35 AM
  4. MBTI & Home-Education
    By Rowan in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-27-2008, 08:17 PM
  5. Formal Education
    By substitute in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-05-2008, 04:21 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO