if they go back, they go back because of people with your worldview who refuse to give them the space and tools to actually change. its a vicious cycle caused by people like you.
and if you truly believe there I no hope for them, then there is no point in prison, but rather you should support instead summary execution.
if there is no room in your view of criminals for their rehabilitation, for reentering society, for second chances, for forgiveness and mercy, then why do you support prisons at all? you should support instead summary execution for all crimes. anything else is illogical.
if instead you view prison as a punishment, a debt to society to be paid, a chance to rehabilitee and re-enter society becoming once again a contributing member, then you must support mercy, you must support second chances, you must support ideas that further that goal, and oppose concepts or methods to hinder it. methods like this no-human-contact stupidity.
The national average is ~11k per student. But, averages being averages, the majority of US states and districts spend far less than that. so the median number doesn't really mean much. And it's because in this country we primarily fund schools through property taxes.
Live a poor low income area? Your schools will also be poorly funded. Live in a wealth neighborhood, or near a bunch of successful tech startups? Your district will probably be rolling in dough.
The national average is ~11k. But in my state the avg is ~9k. But in my personal school district, which by the way is a theoretical "rich suburb" of the metro area, the amount per student is actually only 6600. Why? Because averages. And because the actual rich people, while having a address that's technically part of the rich suburb, are actually in a separate school district. The "rich suburb school district" actually only encompasses the working class neighborhoods of the burb and covers ~ 60 schools. The rich folks meanwhile have their own district, encompassing just 2 schools, and it funds its schools to the tune of ~20k per student. And they have tremendously better outcomes and graduations rates to go with it.
In fact, the distribution for school funding almost exactly matches the chart of the income distribution (and inequality): The majority of people (school districts) are below the average, and then there's sharp spike on the right at the very top that drags the average up, causing the "average" to be misleading.
The point is simple. Yes, the rote methods we learned by memorization work. But they can be damn hard to explain, especially to young children. All too often they don't know WHAT they are doing, or WHY they are doing it. They just know it works.
that's not a recipe for success down the road when the math gets harder. these methods take the opposite approach: teaching kids the math we ACUTALLY do in our heads (even when using the rote algorithm methods of carrying or borrowing), to ensure that the kids actually learn the WHAT and WHY of number manipulation, not just the HOW. building that innate number sense now, when they are young and just learning numbers, will make math easier for them down the road.
Comments obviously coming from someone with absolutely no knowledge of administration, in any setting, let alone a school. No sir, you are the delusional one.
No you didn't. And if you did, you're a fool, who rejected a job for a foolish reason.
And you have it backwards : allowing taxi companies to get away with not calling themselves taxi companies, and thus ignore the rules all other taxis have to obey, is actually a method to eliminate competition, not preserve it. The result of the vote actually preserves the level playing field of competition.
If you don't see that, then I suggest you brush up on your Adam Smith, because somewhere along the way your view of competition got corrupted by ignorance.
Cause all those consumer protection laws...they were just made by bureaucrats who woke up one morning and said " I want to make a businessman's life hell!".
they weren't at all enacted after rampant and repeated abuses of consumers....oh no. that wasn't it at all....
Libertarianism is a bankrupt ideology. It's nothing more than anarchy for the weak and powerless, and unrestricted power* for the already powerful. (*used to say socialism there, but really, it's whatever the powerful want)
"Let the market decide"...
As in..."We shouldn't regulate tobacco...we should let the market decide"...after all, its not like the companies are going to lie and cover up research? And surely if people are dying millions of preventable deaths...the market will force them to self-regulate, and consumers wont let them get away with it...right? Now excuse me while I send in this ad campaign of a cool cartoon character to market to kids, and pay off these "researchers".
Or..."We shouldn't restrict lead." So what if the rest of the world did in the 1920s because of ill effects. We got all this research saying its harmless! We put it in paint, gasoline...everything! It's everywhere in the environment, and it's totally safe? Right? And if it wasn't...consumers would demand we change, right?
"Let the market decide"... Yeah..sure. That always works. And I run a unicorn ranch on the Arizona coast.
Self regulation is a fairy tale told by ignorant shills. Ignorant, because they've been duped into shilling for these companies for free because of a failed ideology that doesn't work in the real world.
no, I think most people are smart enough to realize that as a taxi company Uber and Lyft should be subject to the same regs as other taxi companies. if there is indeed too much regulation, then the solution is to reduce those regulations, not flaunt them by using a buzzword, denying that your company is one, and throwing a fit when those regs DO get reduced so that you make competition has the same benefits as you (killing your business model of just ignoring the law).
the tobacco industry is a GREAT example. or early food processors. or DuPont's legacy involving C8, using in making Teflon, a chemical now so prevalent that there is no place on earthNOT contaminated by it. or lead, something most of the rest of world had reduced usage of by the 1920s, but the US went along putting in everything, everywhere, for another 60 years, blatantly ignoring, at the behest of the companies dependent on it, all the science pointing to its ill effects.
the fact is that damages to the business have never scared companies from poisoning customers, destroying the environment, or any other possible harms. they are amoral institutions that know exactly what the value of a human life is to their bottom line. and the math frequently comes out to "we can afford to harm X number of people before profits suffer", and then they operate as such.
self-regulation is a fairy tale told by the ignorant.
weasels words that overamplify their importance from essentially none to something.
he was fired incompetence, for mismanagement. your article does NOT support you. you engaged in deliberate misdirection and BS. like saying a murder in person went to prison "because among other things he ran a red light", when what sent him to prison was the f'ing murder.
Slashdot Mirror
if they go back, they go back because of people with your worldview who refuse to give them the space and tools to actually change.
its a vicious cycle caused by people like you.
and if you truly believe there I no hope for them, then there is no point in prison, but rather you should support instead summary execution.
seriously?
that comment alone proves you've no connection to reality, and the inverse maxim "reality has a liberal bias".
its not spinning.
its what the words mean.
to be a majority means to be more than 50%.
is 47% > 50%?
No.
It cannot be a majority and be less than 50% at the same time.
the word you want is plurality.
and trying to add in property crime, out of the blue for no logical reason, is just dumb.
if there is no room in your view of criminals for their rehabilitation, for reentering society, for second chances, for forgiveness and mercy, then why do you support prisons at all? you should support instead summary execution for all crimes. anything else is illogical.
if instead you view prison as a punishment, a debt to society to be paid, a chance to rehabilitee and re-enter society becoming once again a contributing member, then you must support mercy, you must support second chances, you must support ideas that further that goal, and oppose concepts or methods to hinder it. methods like this no-human-contact stupidity.
oh thank Romero.
gave me a panic attack.
No they don't.
You don't have a single f'ing clue what you're talking about.
NPR has been running a series on this, diving deep into what is actually going on.
I suggest you correct your ignorance (for indeed, you are the only one poisoning anyone's minds) by reading it.
( http://www.npr.org/2016/04/18/... )
( http://www.npr.org/2016/05/01/... )
( http://www.npr.org/sections/ed... )
But I can condense it some for you:
The national average is ~11k per student.
But, averages being averages, the majority of US states and districts spend far less than that.
so the median number doesn't really mean much.
And it's because in this country we primarily fund schools through property taxes.
Live a poor low income area? Your schools will also be poorly funded.
Live in a wealth neighborhood, or near a bunch of successful tech startups? Your district will probably be rolling in dough.
The national average is ~11k.
But in my state the avg is ~9k.
But in my personal school district, which by the way is a theoretical "rich suburb" of the metro area, the amount per student is actually only 6600.
Why? Because averages. And because the actual rich people, while having a address that's technically part of the rich suburb, are actually in a separate school district. The "rich suburb school district" actually only encompasses the working class neighborhoods of the burb and covers ~ 60 schools. The rich folks meanwhile have their own district, encompassing just 2 schools, and it funds its schools to the tune of ~20k per student. And they have tremendously better outcomes and graduations rates to go with it.
In fact, the distribution for school funding almost exactly matches the chart of the income distribution (and inequality):
The majority of people (school districts) are below the average, and then there's sharp spike on the right at the very top that drags the average up, causing the "average" to be misleading.
This is the income distribution graph:
http://theglitteringeye.com/im...
And this is the school funding distribution graph:
below the map applet
Now do you see why your comments were utter ignorance?
couple more from same author:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/f...\
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/f...
The point is simple.
Yes, the rote methods we learned by memorization work.
But they can be damn hard to explain, especially to young children.
All too often they don't know WHAT they are doing, or WHY they are doing it.
They just know it works.
that's not a recipe for success down the road when the math gets harder.
these methods take the opposite approach: teaching kids the math we ACUTALLY do in our heads (even when using the rote algorithm methods of carrying or borrowing), to ensure that the kids actually learn the WHAT and WHY of number manipulation, not just the HOW . building that innate number sense now, when they are young and just learning numbers, will make math easier for them down the road.
It's only looney if you don't know what you're talking about.
To correct that deficiency, I suggest reading these:
http://www.salon.com/2015/11/2...
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/f...
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/f...
Comments obviously coming from someone with absolutely no knowledge of administration, in any setting, let alone a school.
No sir, you are the delusional one.
^delusional
No, Cruz dropped out.
since we use the Arabic numerals, wasn't he technically writing in Arabic?
REGEN!!?!??!
BLASPHEMY!!
Med kits!
And Blue bottle thingies, laying around.
That's what it needs.
hahahhahahahha.
oh you libertarians.
so funny.
so ignorant.
No you didn't.
And if you did, you're a fool, who rejected a job for a foolish reason.
And you have it backwards : allowing taxi companies to get away with not calling themselves taxi companies, and thus ignore the rules all other taxis have to obey, is actually a method to eliminate competition, not preserve it. The result of the vote actually preserves the level playing field of competition.
If you don't see that, then I suggest you brush up on your Adam Smith, because somewhere along the way your view of competition got corrupted by ignorance.
Cause all those consumer protection laws...they were just made by bureaucrats who woke up one morning and said " I want to make a businessman's life hell!".
they weren't at all enacted after rampant and repeated abuses of consumers....oh no. that wasn't it at all....
Libertarianism is a bankrupt ideology.
It's nothing more than anarchy for the weak and powerless, and unrestricted power* for the already powerful.
(*used to say socialism there, but really, it's whatever the powerful want)
"Let the market decide"...
As in..."We shouldn't regulate tobacco...we should let the market decide"...after all, its not like the companies are going to lie and cover up research? And surely if people are dying millions of preventable deaths...the market will force them to self-regulate, and consumers wont let them get away with it...right? Now excuse me while I send in this ad campaign of a cool cartoon character to market to kids, and pay off these "researchers".
Or..."We shouldn't restrict lead." So what if the rest of the world did in the 1920s because of ill effects. We got all this research saying its harmless! We put it in paint, gasoline...everything! It's everywhere in the environment, and it's totally safe? Right? And if it wasn't...consumers would demand we change, right?
"Let the market decide"...
Yeah..sure. That always works.
And I run a unicorn ranch on the Arizona coast.
Self regulation is a fairy tale told by ignorant shills.
Ignorant, because they've been duped into shilling for these companies for free because of a failed ideology that doesn't work in the real world.
oh now youre just being stupid.
did I say now?
sorry, I didn't mean to imply that was a recent change on your part.
found the shill.
and minimum wage is "supposed to be for teenagers", even though that's not ever been true or the actual main demographic of people working said jobs.
i suggest that you don't actually know many people who drive for them.
waaaah.
no, I think most people are smart enough to realize that as a taxi company Uber and Lyft should be subject to the same regs as other taxi companies.
if there is indeed too much regulation, then the solution is to reduce those regulations, not flaunt them by using a buzzword, denying that your company is one, and throwing a fit when those regs DO get reduced so that you make competition has the same benefits as you (killing your business model of just ignoring the law).
rank utter ignorance.
research some actual corporate malfeasance.
the tobacco industry is a GREAT example.
or early food processors.
or DuPont's legacy involving C8, using in making Teflon, a chemical now so prevalent that there is no place on earth NOT contaminated by it.
or lead, something most of the rest of world had reduced usage of by the 1920s, but the US went along putting in everything, everywhere, for another 60 years, blatantly ignoring, at the behest of the companies dependent on it, all the science pointing to its ill effects.
the fact is that damages to the business have never scared companies from poisoning customers, destroying the environment, or any other possible harms. they are amoral institutions that know exactly what the value of a human life is to their bottom line. and the math frequently comes out to "we can afford to harm X number of people before profits suffer", and then they operate as such.
self-regulation is a fairy tale told by the ignorant.
and a perfect demonstration of why it's a joke ideology: let wait until AFTER they do something to find out they're a wanted serial killer.
brilliant.
not a troll post mi, so put your sockpuppet away.
weasels words that overamplify their importance from essentially none to something.
he was fired incompetence, for mismanagement.
your article does NOT support you.
you engaged in deliberate misdirection and BS.
like saying a murder in person went to prison "because among other things he ran a red light", when what sent him to prison was the f'ing murder.
ie, you lied, again.