Nicholas Tampio, associate professor of political science
Philanthropists such as Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg
You know the big thing missing from debates on how to best educate children? People who actually know anything about educating children.
Instead of turning to an associate professor of political science, how about we turn to someone with a PHD in early childhood development? Or young childhood education?
You know, turning to someone who actually knows what they are talking about instead of someone spouting off their personal opinion with a fancy-sounding but irrelevant title.
Why was that modded down? We do need better teaching. We could probably start with better teachers. We're seeing elementary school teachers failing in elementary math
Ok. Pay more.
Just like every other thing on the planet, you get what you pay for. We (in the US) pay teachers shitty wages. We get shitty teachers, because the only people taking the job are people who don't get a better job elsewhere. And the vast majority of that "better job" is the pay.
So, open your pocketbook or stop whining that you are getting what you pay for.
You've ignored that the "sanctuary" state of California and the cities within have shown no inclination to do anything to deport illegal immigrants
Which federal laws are states required to enforce? Heck, which federal laws are state law enforcement allowed to enforce? (I'll give you a hint: none). Also, remember all the times you got upset about "state's rights"? Well, here's an open-and-shut state's rights issue. Yet you're so upset about following "state's rights" doctrine in this case.
*snort* The Democrats have become the party of illegal immigration. Immigrants are the party's base of the future. If Democrats were really serious about immigration, they'd work with Trump and bring a sane immigration policy that put American interests first.
The rate of deportations during the Obama administration skyrocketed. Obama ended a whole lot of Bush administration policies that allowed undocumented workers to work in the US. The only new thing Trump is doing on the border is 1) child abuse, and 2) illegally arresting people who attempt to claim asylum. Neither one has significantly increased the rate of deportations from the Obama administration.
Why'd Obama do this? He believed that a "get tough" policy would help the Republicans work with him to bring a sane immigration policy that put American interest first. The fact that you know zero of these facts demonstrates just how willing the Republicans are to work with Democrats to do so.
Given that California is a "sanctuary" state, what makes you think officials there would do what it takes to look for election fraud?
First, doing anything to attract attention to yourself is a fantastic way to get deported. Going to a polling place is something that attracts attention.
Second, committing a felony is an even more fantastic way to get deported (entering the US illegally is a misdemeanor, BTW)
Third, there are Republicans staffing every polling place in California. Both parties supply poll workers to ensure the other party isn't cheating.
Fourth, poll workers don't just hand out ballots to everyone in line. The person has to be registered, they have to recite their name and address, and then the poll workers mark them as having received a ballot. Which means when the real voter shows up and tries to cast a ballot, the poll workers, including the Republican ones, immediately detect that there is a problem. Even if they don't literally catch the person who committed voter fraud, they know it happened. And if it requires millions of people to do it, it's not possible to have zero cases where both the real and fake voter attempt to vote.
Fifth, you are asserting that millions of people can remain absolutely silent about their crimes, and have done so over many, many years. The fact that you know there are undocumented workers in the US, and that they provide false documentation for I-9 forms, demonstrates that this is false.
Sixth, registration isn't just "turn in the form and you get a ballot". Your data is verified in the relevant databases.
Seventh, "sanctuary state" means jack shit for this. All it means is the state law enforcement will not do the work for federal law enforcement. It's the feds jobs to enforce immigration law, so the feds need to do the work or pay for it. Also, it's going to be hilarious when the right starts trying to argue about "state's rights" after being so angry with California following that doctrine.
Seventh, if you actually gave a damn about people entering the country illegally, you'd want to go after the employers who illegally employ those workers. No jobs, no workers coming for those jobs. The employers have fixed addresses so they're easy to find, and they already have to turn forms in to the government demonstrating their crime. It's incredibly easy to catch them......but you want to build a wall instead....because apparently you think they don't have access to the amazing technology known as "a boat".
So they'll keep telling you it's those "damn illegals" with zero evidence. Because you'll happily eat up any story that fits your worldview no matter how false it is.
How the funk should that work? No one sees the belly?
Seeing the belly is not a step in filing the paperwork for a birth certificate. Don't fill out the forms, and the kid does not exist as far as the government is concerned.
You don't bring the kid into kindergarden? It does not go to school? It has no healthcare? It is never sick? It has no passport or ID card?
Yes to all those except getting sick. It's a really bad situation for the kid.
Compared to Chinas problems in 30 years that is peanuts
China had a famine. It's a relatively short-term and "self-correcting" problem. Obvious it's awful to be part of the correction, but the the famine will end on its own as people starve to death.
Japan's entire economy is going into deep trouble because they're not able to replace the older workers who die. They're also going to have very large problems supporting their older workers post-retirement, since they have so few younger people. The natural inclination in a collapsing economy is to not have children, which makes the problem worse. Which causes people to have fewer children, which makes the problem worse.....
The way other countries deal with this is immigration supplies more young people to make up the shortfall, but Japan hates immigrants. If you are born to foreign parents in Japan and live your entire life there, you will not be considered "Japanese" by most people there. So they are not willing to import enough people to make up the shortfall in younger workers.
So, they're fucked. They're going to have to either go through a multi-decade economic disaster, or there will have to be fundamental changes in Japanese culture. They've started a bit in the latter, in that it is no longer as taboo for women to go back to work after having children. That helps give them some more workers, but it's not enough to fix it. So things are going to get painful for a long time.
If you halve the replacement rate but double the average life span, you still end up with the same number of people.
No, replacement rate is not replace-per-year. It's replace-per-woman-before-she-dies.
If people live twice as long but women average 2.1 children, you still have the same number of people. Doesn't matter if the woman lives to 120 if she only has 2 kids during her life.
The thing is, people aren't breeding. Or more precisely, we are doing a lot less breeding than we used to.
The developed world, except for the US, is below replacement rate. Replacement rate is about 2.1 children per woman (1 to replace the woman, 1 to replace the man, 0.1 to replace the people who die before having children or are infertile). The US is at about 2.3. Much of Europe is at 1.8-2.0. Populations in these countries are only stable or climbing due to immigration from the developing world.
In the developing world, birth rate is plummeting as women get better education and access to birth control. It's still above replacement rate, but it's way down from what it used to be and is still trending downward.
"Number of humans on the planet" is not yet a solved problem, but it's in the process of getting solved.
I'd would have thought seeing how China's one child policy lifted them out of poverty in record time might have slowed the breeding. But nope, people keep making more at an incredible rate.
'Couple problems with this.
First, the Chinese had a whole lot of "unofficial" babies that weren't reported to the government. So they didn't really go one child for everyone....and the program was ended a while ago. Also, the thing that "lifted China out of poverty" was industrialization, not a low birth rate. If you want to see what a low birth rate does to an economy, take a look at Japan. They're starting to have some pretty big problems.
Second, global birth rate is falling. Developed nations other than the US are below replacement rate, and the US is almost below it. Populations in the developed world are only stable or climbing due to immigration. Developing nations are dropping as women there receive better education and greater access to birth control.
if it was backing Trump, it would be proof of collusion and Russians gaming the system to gin up support for Trump
Um....no? If it was backing Trump, it would be anti-proof of Russian collusion. Because Trump is the best thing for them geopolitically, and they don't want to upset that.
since it's backing Democratic causes, it's somehow "splitting" the Democratic vote?
Well, the relevant pages are trying to convince Democratic voters that Democratic candidates are not good enough. The pages are not saying "vote for the Democrat".
According to many people who are fighting efforts to stop efforts like requiring picture ID to vote, there is no election fraud going on
Election fraud is not the same thing as voter fraud.
Voter fraud is when you go to the polls, claim you are someone else, and vote illegally. That happens so rarely as to have no effect. There were 4 proven cases of voter fraud in the 2016 election.
Election fraud is when the government or another entity changes the results of the election. That may or may not be happening. We have no data, because states routinely destroy the evidence as quickly as possible (shred ballots, wipe voting machines, etc). You'd think they'd want to carefully audit the results of every election, but they don't do that.
A suggestion to improve this: - Elections are on a Saturday and Sunday. - Employers are required to give their employees at least one of those days off.
Just have the ballots from #2 be provisional. They won't get counted in most elections (they aren't counted if there are fewer provisional ballots than the spread between the winner and second-place). If the provisional ballots matter, they are vetted before being counted. And they'll be a registered voter for the next election.
When you pass the law requiring IDs, have a section making it illegal to punish anyone for going to get one.
This is hilarious if you think this would work.
If this passed, the official reason for your firing would be "bad attitude" or "poor attendance". Wanna fight it? What makes you think someone who couldn't afford to take time off to get an ID can afford a lawyer?
Beyond that, seriously, I mean, I've needed to provide a state ID to get every job I've ever had
The I-9 form accepts a lot more IDs than voter ID laws do.
Not in my state they don't... you get one from the state at cost to the taxpayers upon registering to vote
Does your state pay the cost of getting all the supporting documentation for that ID? 'Cause a new certified copy of my birth certificate costs $50. Or I can pick one up for free if I travel the 2000 miles to the county where I was born.
Even though I can personally afford that, it took me 9 attempts to get a drivers license when I moved to NY. RealID had been "implemented", but they were still fucking around with what supporting documentation you had to supply, so the rules kept changing each time I attempted to get one. I suspect there was a bit of discrimination involved due to the glee the DMV worker showed crossing off the "Motor-Voter" section of the form where I was registering to vote at the same time.
Anyway, the reason voter ID laws are racist are twofold. First and primarily, the people who can't afford cost for the ID and the supporting documentation tend to be minorities.
Second, the places where you can obtain the necessary ID tend to do things that restrict the ability for the poor and minorities to get them. For example, only open during limited hours, not located near public transit, placed in the "white" part of town, and so on.
Third, the selection of IDs in most voter ID laws include IDs more commonly obtained by whites and explicitly exclude IDs more commonly obtained by non-whites. For example, Texas allows hunting licenses to act as voter ID (mostly whites), and forbids IDs from state universities (mixed races, but very common only ID for a non-driving minority).
You need ID to buy cars, cigarettes, alcohol, guns, etc. and it's not racist
See the comments above about the selection of valid IDs. There's lots of IDs that count in those situations (ex. student ID) that do not count under voter ID laws.
Also, you have no fundamental right to driving a car on public roads, nor a fundamental right to purchasing cigarettes, or alcohol. Also guns can be bought without ID, you just have fewer places that will sell a gun without ID.
Slashdot Mirror
Nicholas Tampio, associate professor of political science
Philanthropists such as Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg
You know the big thing missing from debates on how to best educate children?
People who actually know anything about educating children.
Instead of turning to an associate professor of political science, how about we turn to someone with a PHD in early childhood development? Or young childhood education?
You know, turning to someone who actually knows what they are talking about instead of someone spouting off their personal opinion with a fancy-sounding but irrelevant title.
Why was that modded down? We do need better teaching. We could probably start with better teachers. We're seeing elementary school teachers failing in elementary math
Ok. Pay more.
Just like every other thing on the planet, you get what you pay for. We (in the US) pay teachers shitty wages. We get shitty teachers, because the only people taking the job are people who don't get a better job elsewhere. And the vast majority of that "better job" is the pay.
So, open your pocketbook or stop whining that you are getting what you pay for.
Almost like it's intentional.....
In the vast majority of the US, the utility poles are owned by a private electric company.
And you realize that the government realizes by itself that there is an extra kid, right?
And it does this by........?
You've ignored that the "sanctuary" state of California and the cities within have shown no inclination to do anything to deport illegal immigrants
Which federal laws are states required to enforce? Heck, which federal laws are state law enforcement allowed to enforce? (I'll give you a hint: none). Also, remember all the times you got upset about "state's rights"? Well, here's an open-and-shut state's rights issue. Yet you're so upset about following "state's rights" doctrine in this case.
*snort* The Democrats have become the party of illegal immigration. Immigrants are the party's base of the future. If Democrats were really serious about immigration, they'd work with Trump and bring a sane immigration policy that put American interests first.
The rate of deportations during the Obama administration skyrocketed. Obama ended a whole lot of Bush administration policies that allowed undocumented workers to work in the US. The only new thing Trump is doing on the border is 1) child abuse, and 2) illegally arresting people who attempt to claim asylum. Neither one has significantly increased the rate of deportations from the Obama administration.
Why'd Obama do this? He believed that a "get tough" policy would help the Republicans work with him to bring a sane immigration policy that put American interest first. The fact that you know zero of these facts demonstrates just how willing the Republicans are to work with Democrats to do so.
Given that California is a "sanctuary" state, what makes you think officials there would do what it takes to look for election fraud?
First, doing anything to attract attention to yourself is a fantastic way to get deported. Going to a polling place is something that attracts attention.
Second, committing a felony is an even more fantastic way to get deported (entering the US illegally is a misdemeanor, BTW)
Third, there are Republicans staffing every polling place in California. Both parties supply poll workers to ensure the other party isn't cheating.
Fourth, poll workers don't just hand out ballots to everyone in line. The person has to be registered, they have to recite their name and address, and then the poll workers mark them as having received a ballot. Which means when the real voter shows up and tries to cast a ballot, the poll workers, including the Republican ones, immediately detect that there is a problem. Even if they don't literally catch the person who committed voter fraud, they know it happened. And if it requires millions of people to do it, it's not possible to have zero cases where both the real and fake voter attempt to vote.
Fifth, you are asserting that millions of people can remain absolutely silent about their crimes, and have done so over many, many years. The fact that you know there are undocumented workers in the US, and that they provide false documentation for I-9 forms, demonstrates that this is false.
Sixth, registration isn't just "turn in the form and you get a ballot". Your data is verified in the relevant databases.
Seventh, "sanctuary state" means jack shit for this. All it means is the state law enforcement will not do the work for federal law enforcement. It's the feds jobs to enforce immigration law, so the feds need to do the work or pay for it. Also, it's going to be hilarious when the right starts trying to argue about "state's rights" after being so angry with California following that doctrine.
Seventh, if you actually gave a damn about people entering the country illegally, you'd want to go after the employers who illegally employ those workers. No jobs, no workers coming for those jobs. The employers have fixed addresses so they're easy to find, and they already have to turn forms in to the government demonstrating their crime. It's incredibly easy to catch them......but you want to build a wall instead....because apparently you think they don't have access to the amazing technology known as "a boat".
So they'll keep telling you it's those "damn illegals" with zero evidence. Because you'll happily eat up any story that fits your worldview no matter how false it is.
I think you need to establish that it is not working first. There were 4 confirmed cases of voter fraud in 2016 out of ~130 million votes.
"Widespread voter fraud" is a myth. But it sure keeps you tuned in and buying.
However the GP claimed that it was "easy" to have extra kids, which it most likely was not.
You realize the kid gets born whether or not you tell the government about it, right?
How the funk should that work? No one sees the belly?
Seeing the belly is not a step in filing the paperwork for a birth certificate. Don't fill out the forms, and the kid does not exist as far as the government is concerned.
You don't bring the kid into kindergarden? It does not go to school? It has no healthcare? It is never sick? It has no passport or ID card?
Yes to all those except getting sick. It's a really bad situation for the kid.
Compared to Chinas problems in 30 years that is peanuts
China had a famine. It's a relatively short-term and "self-correcting" problem. Obvious it's awful to be part of the correction, but the the famine will end on its own as people starve to death.
Japan's entire economy is going into deep trouble because they're not able to replace the older workers who die. They're also going to have very large problems supporting their older workers post-retirement, since they have so few younger people. The natural inclination in a collapsing economy is to not have children, which makes the problem worse. Which causes people to have fewer children, which makes the problem worse.....
The way other countries deal with this is immigration supplies more young people to make up the shortfall, but Japan hates immigrants. If you are born to foreign parents in Japan and live your entire life there, you will not be considered "Japanese" by most people there. So they are not willing to import enough people to make up the shortfall in younger workers.
So, they're fucked. They're going to have to either go through a multi-decade economic disaster, or there will have to be fundamental changes in Japanese culture. They've started a bit in the latter, in that it is no longer as taboo for women to go back to work after having children. That helps give them some more workers, but it's not enough to fix it. So things are going to get painful for a long time.
If you halve the replacement rate but double the average life span, you still end up with the same number of people.
No, replacement rate is not replace-per-year. It's replace-per-woman-before-she-dies.
If people live twice as long but women average 2.1 children, you still have the same number of people. Doesn't matter if the woman lives to 120 if she only has 2 kids during her life.
The thing is, people aren't breeding. Or more precisely, we are doing a lot less breeding than we used to.
The developed world, except for the US, is below replacement rate. Replacement rate is about 2.1 children per woman (1 to replace the woman, 1 to replace the man, 0.1 to replace the people who die before having children or are infertile). The US is at about 2.3. Much of Europe is at 1.8-2.0. Populations in these countries are only stable or climbing due to immigration from the developing world.
In the developing world, birth rate is plummeting as women get better education and access to birth control. It's still above replacement rate, but it's way down from what it used to be and is still trending downward.
"Number of humans on the planet" is not yet a solved problem, but it's in the process of getting solved.
I'd would have thought seeing how China's one child policy lifted them out of poverty in record time might have slowed the breeding. But nope, people keep making more at an incredible rate.
'Couple problems with this.
First, the Chinese had a whole lot of "unofficial" babies that weren't reported to the government. So they didn't really go one child for everyone....and the program was ended a while ago. Also, the thing that "lifted China out of poverty" was industrialization, not a low birth rate. If you want to see what a low birth rate does to an economy, take a look at Japan. They're starting to have some pretty big problems.
Second, global birth rate is falling. Developed nations other than the US are below replacement rate, and the US is almost below it. Populations in the developed world are only stable or climbing due to immigration. Developing nations are dropping as women there receive better education and greater access to birth control.
If there are no job openings in brain surgeon, well going to school to be one is pretty dumb
If you can reliably predict the economy 12 years ahead of time, you should be making a fortune on Wall Street instead of being a brain surgeon.
You being Triggered is what will send me to the polls here soon.
And this opinion was formed thanks to a large quantity of Fox News. Thanks for watching, please buy from our sponsors.
if it was backing Trump, it would be proof of collusion and Russians gaming the system to gin up support for Trump
Um....no? If it was backing Trump, it would be anti-proof of Russian collusion. Because Trump is the best thing for them geopolitically, and they don't want to upset that.
since it's backing Democratic causes, it's somehow "splitting" the Democratic vote?
Well, the relevant pages are trying to convince Democratic voters that Democratic candidates are not good enough. The pages are not saying "vote for the Democrat".
Exactly. The federal government can't be in charge of securing the election for itself. Classic conflict of interest.
And there's no conflict for the state being in charge of securing the election for itself? Elections are not only for federal offices.
Did you forget to think this argument through?
According to many people who are fighting efforts to stop efforts like requiring picture ID to vote, there is no election fraud going on
Election fraud is not the same thing as voter fraud.
Voter fraud is when you go to the polls, claim you are someone else, and vote illegally. That happens so rarely as to have no effect. There were 4 proven cases of voter fraud in the 2016 election.
Election fraud is when the government or another entity changes the results of the election. That may or may not be happening. We have no data, because states routinely destroy the evidence as quickly as possible (shred ballots, wipe voting machines, etc). You'd think they'd want to carefully audit the results of every election, but they don't do that.
It's really common for politicians to do things that are only in their short-term interest with zero thought to long-term consequences.
The fact that Russia may help your opponents in the future does not mean they are unwilling to accept that help right now.
1. Election days are national holiday
A suggestion to improve this:
- Elections are on a Saturday and Sunday.
- Employers are required to give their employees at least one of those days off.
Just have the ballots from #2 be provisional. They won't get counted in most elections (they aren't counted if there are fewer provisional ballots than the spread between the winner and second-place). If the provisional ballots matter, they are vetted before being counted. And they'll be a registered voter for the next election.
Not all states allow you to vote absentee without a reason.
The I-9 form accepts a lot of things that are not accepted as voter ID.
When you pass the law requiring IDs, have a section making it illegal to punish anyone for going to get one.
This is hilarious if you think this would work.
If this passed, the official reason for your firing would be "bad attitude" or "poor attendance". Wanna fight it? What makes you think someone who couldn't afford to take time off to get an ID can afford a lawyer?
Beyond that, seriously, I mean, I've needed to provide a state ID to get every job I've ever had
The I-9 form accepts a lot more IDs than voter ID laws do.
Not in my state they don't... you get one from the state at cost to the taxpayers upon registering to vote
Does your state pay the cost of getting all the supporting documentation for that ID? 'Cause a new certified copy of my birth certificate costs $50. Or I can pick one up for free if I travel the 2000 miles to the county where I was born.
Even though I can personally afford that, it took me 9 attempts to get a drivers license when I moved to NY. RealID had been "implemented", but they were still fucking around with what supporting documentation you had to supply, so the rules kept changing each time I attempted to get one. I suspect there was a bit of discrimination involved due to the glee the DMV worker showed crossing off the "Motor-Voter" section of the form where I was registering to vote at the same time.
Anyway, the reason voter ID laws are racist are twofold.
First and primarily, the people who can't afford cost for the ID and the supporting documentation tend to be minorities.
Second, the places where you can obtain the necessary ID tend to do things that restrict the ability for the poor and minorities to get them. For example, only open during limited hours, not located near public transit, placed in the "white" part of town, and so on.
Third, the selection of IDs in most voter ID laws include IDs more commonly obtained by whites and explicitly exclude IDs more commonly obtained by non-whites. For example, Texas allows hunting licenses to act as voter ID (mostly whites), and forbids IDs from state universities (mixed races, but very common only ID for a non-driving minority).
You need ID to buy cars, cigarettes, alcohol, guns, etc. and it's not racist
See the comments above about the selection of valid IDs. There's lots of IDs that count in those situations (ex. student ID) that do not count under voter ID laws.
Also, you have no fundamental right to driving a car on public roads, nor a fundamental right to purchasing cigarettes, or alcohol. Also guns can be bought without ID, you just have fewer places that will sell a gun without ID.