Privatize education

[IlyaK1986]

If you're gifted, you're gifted. It doesn't matter your color, race, religion (in most cases--see: Aafia Siddiqui), etc...

If you're talented, you're talented. So long as you will use your talents for the progress of humanity, then you should have it cultivated so that you may put it to use, and reap lavish rewards for yourself, but more importantly, for your society.

 

[ajblaise]

Whenever I read your posts, I wonder if you just put down Time magazine, or some other useless periodical. Your posts are full of platitudes like "the poor condition of black education in America". You're clearly trying to make it sound like people who are against public education are racist.

Here's some reality for you. It's not about race, it's about class and the fact that government intervention exacerbates that problem. The rich will always be able to afford education, regardless of the system. When the government wrecks a system, like it has with education, the poor are affected the most. They're the ones stuck with crappy government run schools. In the past, there were charity funded schools, but not anymore. Government involvement has caused people to stop donating money for that cause because the government has assumed that responsibility. Can the solution be any more simple? I don't think so, but some people are obsessed with top-down organizations. They can't understand how systems can form naturally, without direction from above.

Do you even disagree with the quote "the poor condition of black education in America"? It is in poor condition, that's a fact.

And I have no problem dividing things by class instead of race...but since blacks and minorities also tend to be in the lower classes, it doesn't matter which word you use.

Your Charity school dream is a reach. Conservatives and libertarians simply aren't usually the ones trying to come up with way to help minorities, because they are against taking public funds to help people generally, and they are against preferential treatment like with AA.

 

[ajblaise]

If you're gifted, you're gifted. It doesn't matter your color, race, religion (in most cases--see: Aafia Siddiqui), etc...

If you're talented, you're talented. So long as you will use your talents for the progress of humanity, then you should have it cultivated so that you may put it to use, and reap lavish rewards for yourself, but more importantly, for your society.

If you're a talented white person it's a lot easier to succeed then if you are a talented black person. Whites are presented with so many more opportunities to take advantage of generally.

 

[Lateralus]

If you're a talented white person it's a lot easier to succeed then if you are a talented black person. Whites are presented with so many more opportunities to take advantage of generally.

That is simply not true.

 

[ajblaise]

That is simply not true.

White families tend to have more money...there is more opportunity right there. Are you kidding?

 

[Lateralus]

Do you even disagree with the quote "the poor condition of black education in America"? It is in poor condition, that's a fact.

And I have no problem dividing things by class instead of race...but since blacks and minorities also tend to be in the lower classes, it doesn't matter which word you use.

So why use the less accurate designation? There are lots of rich and middle class blacks who enjoy the same opportunities as rich and middle class whites. There are poor whites who have the same disadvantages as poor blacks. I see your use of terminology as disingenuous.

Your Charity school dream is a reach. Conservatives and libertarians simply aren't usually the ones trying to come up with way to help minorities, because they are against taking public funds to help people generally, and they are against preferential treatment like with AA.

It's not a reach. You're really misinformed on the issue. Charity organizations were far more common in the past, but as government started assuming the responsibilities of the charities, their funding dried up. Instead of donating to charity, people were taxed.

 

[Lateralus]

White families tend to have more money...there is more opportunity right there. Are you kidding?

This is such a retarded argument. You keep attributing to race what should be attributed to economic status. Are you intentionally trying to waste my time?

 

[ajblaise]

So why use the less accurate designation? There are lots of rich and middle class blacks who enjoy the same opportunities as rich and middle class whites. There are poor whites who have the same disadvantages as poor blacks. I see your use of terminology as disingenuous.

What's disingenuous about saying the state of black education in America is not good? It's true. Race and class should both be used when discussing demographics.

It's not a reach. You're really misinformed on the issue. Charity organizations were far more common in the past, but as government started assuming the responsibilities of the charities, their funding dried up. Instead of donating to charity, people were taxed.

Expecting charities to pay for everyone's education is impractical. Funding of course would the main issue.

I see this charity school idea as just another part of the libertarian idealist dream world. It doesn't exist for a reason, it if did, that'd be great.

 

[ajblaise]

This is such a retarded argument. You keep attributing to race what should be attributed to economic status. Are you intentionally trying to waste my time?

Do you disagree with that statement or not? Race and economic status are linked, there are patterns. You said the statement was false...but it's true, you won't even deny it.

You are the worst person to discuss politics with because you never make direct retorts, you keep on running somewhere else.

 

[pure_mercury]

One big problem is that whenever there is talk of helping disadvantaged minority groups, economic conservatives protest.

Do you think that may have something to do with the fact that there are just as many poor people in the United States today as there were when we declared "War on Poverty" over 40 years ago, and have spent trillions of dollars on anti-poverty initiatives? Turning the poor into wards of the state is not "helping disadvantaged minority groups" and the left refuses to believe that throwing money at them does little or nothing to alleviate poverty.

 

[Oberon]

Do you think that may have something to do with the fact that there are just as many poor people in the United States today as there were when we declared "War on Poverty" over 40 years ago, and have spent trillions of dollars on anti-poverty initiatives? Turning the poor into wards of the state is not "helping disadvantaged minority groups" and the left refuses to believe that throwing money at them does little or nothing to alleviate poverty.

On the other hand, we have the most obese poor people in the world.

That's progress, right?

 

[pure_mercury]

Expecting charities to pay for everyone's education is impractical. Funding of course would the main issue.

I see this charity school idea as just another part of the libertarian idealist dream world. It doesn't exist for a reason, it if did, that'd be great.

This is a red herring. Saying something should exist if it were a good idea, but doesn't and so isn't, is a BS argument.

Look at charity hospitals. The indigent used to be able to get emergency care for basically nothing 50-60 years ago, but massive government inroads into health care (between Medicare, Medicaid, new regulations, etc.) drove up the costs and caused the rise of the HMO.

BTW, the United States federal government spent $90 billion on education in 2007. Charitable giving was estimated to be over $300 billion. With no federal income tax, charitable giving would be even higher (if you look at the stats, charitable donations ALWAYS increase when tax burdens go down). Between state and local governments and corporate/private/religious donations, it ABSOLUTELY can be done.

 

[Enyo]

If you're a talented white person it's a lot easier to succeed then if you are a talented black person. Whites are presented with so many more opportunities to take advantage of generally.

Are they? Keep in mind that affirmative action is alive and well.

 

[Enyo]

White families tend to have more money...there is more opportunity right there. Are you kidding?

Heh. You think? My family had enough money for us to live comfortably (not lavishly), but not enough money to pay for my university education, and too much money for financial aid. If I'd come from a dirt poor family, I'd have qualified for financial aid.

 

[IlyaK1986]

White families tend to have more money...there is more opportunity right there. Are you kidding?

If you hit the books and prove yourself, you hit the books and prove yourself.

I'm white. I immigrated to this country from Soviet Russia (in which noun verbs you) when I was 4 with my parents having $15 and 2 suitcases between all three of us, and lived in a cockroach infested apartment for two years before living in another one for the next two, until moving to suburbia and eventually my father failed more or less and my mother taught piano all the while to make ends meet.

Tell me about responsibility and ambition, not monetary inequality. I started from nothing, and if all goes well, I'll be making some very good money and living my dream soon enough.

You get out what you put in. Being an amateur rapper and playing street hoops won't get you anywhere. While all of the jocks were shooting hoops and bullying nerds, I was doing my math homework and getting smarter.

The poverty of Jamal Afro is NOT my responsibility. There are plenty of well-off people of all walks of life here in the states. Any failure aside from that which can be attributed to genetic code falls SOLELY on the person experiencing it.

 

[reason]

One big problem is that whenever there is talk of helping disadvantaged minority groups, economic conservatives protest.

Why do you think that race is important? The current state of "black education" in America is irrelevent, because not every single black person receives a poor education. There are schools which are good and other which are bad, there are subcultures which encourage and reward academic achievement, and there are others which discourage and punish academic achievement. There are children who are motivated to learn and be productive, and there are children who are unmotivated to learn and are unproductive.

The target of your concern should not be "black education", because that will inevitably include many black students who go to good schools, are from subcultures which encourage and reward academic achievement, and are motivated to learn and be productive. The target of your concern should be bad schooling, counterproductive cultures and bad attitudes, irrespective of race, nationality, hair colour, accent, or any other obvious and yet wholly irrelevent factor.

 

[ajblaise]

Why do you think that race is important? The current state of "black education" in America is irrelevent, because not every single black person receives a poor education. There are schools which are good and other which are bad, there are subcultures which encourage and reward academic achievement, and there are others which discourage and punish academic achievement. There are children who are motivated to learn and be productive, and there are children who are unmotivated to learn and are unproductive.

The target of your concern should not be "black education", because that will inevitably include many black students who go to good schools, are from subcultures which encourage and reward academic achievement, and are motivated to learn and be productive. The target of your concern should be bad schooling, counterproductive cultures and bad attitudes, irrespective of race, nationality, hair colour, accent, or any other obvious and yet wholly irrelevent factor.

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)

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.

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.

 

[IlyaK1986]

No, they shouldn't. This is America. Everyone should have equal treatment. No affirmative action, no welfare nanny states, nothing of that sort. Wherever you insert competition, the product always winds up for the better. Any barrier to competition lowers standards of living.

 

[ajblaise]

Any barrier to competition lowers standards of living.

Socialist Scandinavia has a lot less competition in their society, but they always sweep the top 10 rankings for quality of life and living standards.

 

[IlyaK1986]

Well of course, if you have a baby state, everyone is happy.

James Simons (IMO the king of the NTs) still counts only as one human being, just like Joe Blow living in little more than a shack in the junky part of Philadelphia.

In America, the middle class is indeed disappearing because the middle class jobs are drying up. Either you're good and you know it and you go at least as high as the clouds, or you're down in a hovel.

One guess as to where I intend to be.