umm did you read the whole article? it said had he not recanted he would have been burned alive. I think it would be interesting, if we ever get time travel, to go back and see these events first hand. I am thinking it got a lot closer than current history wants to admit. Like maybe stuck on a pile of wood and doused with oil, with the guy with the torch coming, kind of close. At one time it was taught he did get burned. So is it revisionist history or was the first version false? I cant say. I certainly cant look it up for the same reason I am having a hard time looking up articles we debated 12 yrs ago on slashdot seem to disappear. now that everything is digital it makes it pretty convenient to just change things without notice. The days of finding microfish articles are a thing of the past.
here in the US there have been nurses who have been sued for malpractice and thrown under the bus by the hospital for making a mistake after being made to work back-to-back 12hr shifts. Another thing about vacation time here, is something called PTO (paid time off) and they give you a bank of days (sometimes 16) where both vacation and sick time is deducted from. If your sick more than 5 or 6 days in a year that can really trash your vacation time.
They just recently passed a law for overime compensation for salary employees but only if they make less than $47,476 annually. That doesnt keep them from working you 60hrs a week it just means they have to pay you. There is no limit how many hours they can make you work. Salary based jobs are usually goal based or project based. Meaning how many hours you work is dependent on how long it takes you to complete the tasks. Its not uncommon to find ones self working well past 40hrs to get all the tasks completed. Normally, these things are handled through the markets because people leave for better jobs. However, when the economy takes a shit, the employers do not get that sort of adjustment as there isnt an abundance of better jobs. It also does nothing for the shitty job itself, they seem to still exist, they just end up with a ton of turnover and for whatever reason the employer does not self-examine that its them thats the problem.
btw how the hell can you claim austrailia doesnt have race problems. I was in perth on a port visit on the USS Abraham lincoln. While in port I had a cabbie get out of his car and chase an aborigonie (spelling) out of the park where he was sleeping. He yelled 'get the hell out of here blackie!'. That doesnt exactly scream no race problem.
inner-city is not a euphamism for race. there are equal number of white/black in the inner-city schools. Inner-city schools are people that live in areas that are mostly zoned industrial. This means the housing is fairly inexpensive. Why its inexpensive is because its not exactly the nicests areas. Crime is fairly high and safety is a serious concern. The areas are usually dilapidated / run down. What they have in common is that the kids are disadvantaged, but its not always because they just drew the short straw. In at least half the cases, they are disadvantaged because the parents are only keeping the kid because it gets them more stipends. They often rarely take care of them, there are social workers permanently assigned to the school system in order to handle the number of cases of neglect. In many cases heroin addiction is the cause of the kids being in this situation. What money the parents make gets spent on heroin instead of food and clothing. If it wasnt for certain programs that require the money to be spent on actual food items like WIC and EBT, these kids would be splitting a can of soup between 4 kids. It has nothing to do with race. Its about, in half the cases, self-imposed poverty because the parents have a serious heroin problem.
their salary for only working 187 days per year is significantly higher than average for my area. Thats why I gave a comparison. To pay a teacher with only 10yrs experience $59k, only work 187 days (ok add at MOST 15 more days) instead of the 250 work days out of the year the average person works. The University here puts out want ads for jobs. They want someone with a Masters degree in Mechanical Engineering and they are only willing to pay $58k a year; and that job expects, at a minimum, a 60hr week commitment. So YES, teachers are over paid by comparison to the rest of everyone else. There is no reason why they should be special. For the record a decent 2500 sq ft house costs less than $225k in this area. The problem with education has nothing to do with salary, and if you think by merely doubling their salary will fix the problems in education, you will have squandered millions. The original poster of this thread made a comparison to china. Yet in all their supposed superiority, their teachers, even accounting for the differences in currency, and average salary, make a fraction of what our teachers make. So no, teachers actually do NOT need a raise to solve our problem in education. I would NOT feel bad making them put in 50hrs per week for 47 weeks out of the year for the exact same salary (roughly 235 days minus a couple holidays and elections that fell outside those weeks off). I refuse to accept an argument where I am told my salary is OK in the same breath that a teacher is considered 'underpaid' for working HALF of the time I put into work. When you find a way to double my salary, then fine, I'll give you the argument about teachers being underpaid.
from what I've read, S Korea is the exception. They are starting to get a large problem of teens/young adults that are so addicted to their online lives they forget to do things like -- feed their baby for 6 days. Sadly I am starting to see some of those coming out of highschool going down this path as well. Throwing their lives away just to jack into the matrix.
my first run-in with the words conservative vs liberal had nothing to do with anything other than government spending. A conservative would not spend money on 'research' to learn if chimpanzees can become addicted to nicotine or if primates get depressed after masturbating 3 times a week. A liberal actually did spend money on both those studies. Money that could be used, instead, on lowering the cost of healthcare or lowering the cost of childcare for lower income earners through some sort of subsidy. It is only because most conservatives were voting republican (not all), and most liberals were voting democrat (not all), and because we, for some reason, have to have a 2 party system that we feel the need to divide everyone into, that this term means nothing about spending other people's money willy-nilly. It used to be possible to be conservative and be a democrat (they used to be called blue-dog democrats). They stood for what they saw as workers rights over corporate abuses, but at the same time didnt think it was the governments job to be a nanny state. At some point they started drawing a line in the sand and demanded people be on one side or the other. Whats your stance on abortion? You cant be for womens rights and be against the government telling you what you can and cannot do in your free time.. that sort of thing. This polarization started in the mid 90s and, like a snowball, it just keeps getting more dangerous.
i guess that depends on if god lives inside or outside this universe, or if he is the universe itself. If he lives outside the universe then sure. But if he lives inside it, or is the universe, then he is bound to live by the rules he created. Only an imperfect person born into sin would see it as a right to get to break your own laws. A perfect being is simply incapable. The term sin literally means to miss the mark, ie imperfect. For if god were to break his own rules, he would be guilty of sin, something he is incapable of. God, being the perfect being he is, will always do things the most efficient, non wasteful method possible. To an eternal being 1 day, 5 billion years, it does not matter as long as its the best way.
thats usually how i respond to that answer. Most of the time they at least concede its possible, and a lack of understanding does not equate to absolute faith over alleged fact. After all, they did ex-communicate Galileo for suggesting the earth revolved around the sun. Burned him alive in fact. To put it in perspective they didnt ex-communicate Hitler despite the atrocities. If you asked the same people their view of the earth orbiting the sun they would agree we all have the same understanding and suggesting the sun revolves around the earth seems silly. What changed over the past 500 years? It used to be as much heresy as evolutionary steps are today. Yet today they have accepted that the earth, does in fact, orbit around the sun. Neither either prove or disprove god. What happened and why it happened are not the same topic. Science only looks at the what, and sometimes theorizes about the why, but without observation, the why is often a guess.
I'm pretty sure the term 'intellectual elite' has nothing to do with education or a condemnation of education. I hope you haven't somehow derived that people at trump rallys are anti-education. The term implies something entirely different. Elitism is a new way to saying looking down your nose at someone (I used to hear that expression a lot as a child, I rarely hear it now). The expression draws the image of someone with their nose up in the air because they are too good to be associating with the likes of you. It dates back to aristocracy. There are many ways someone can think they are better than you
1) race - some people think they belong to a superior race and that trait makes them better than others
2) money - nothing divides the world into clasism or caste based society more so than money. Merely having money causes those who came by it without working for it to often acquire a sense of superiority. The paid staff that wait on your every beckon call feeds this and amplifies it.
3) religion - the belief in whether you burn in hell or not has caused many to feel that they are superior because they are among those that are 'right' and will be vindicated when those that picked 'wrong' are unmercifully punished for it.
4) Intelligence - people can begin to act like a complete douche when they think they are significantly smarter than some other person or group.
Intellectual Elite actually implies someone THINKS they are so much better than everyone else because they THINK they are so much smarter. They arent ACTUALLY smarter, the merely assume they are. Because anyone who does not agree with 100% of everything they say MUST be less intelligent and therefore not worthy to vote because they are just too stupid to have that right/responsibility. Its not a condemnation of education. Its a condemnation of Elitism. The reality is that most of the people that fall into this critisism are actually NOT overly intellectual in nature. For the most part they actually do not do independent thought very well at all. They rely heavily on GroupThink and will tow the GroupThink line on every topic despite how poor their understanding of it actually is. Nothing could exemplify how dangerous GroupThink is better than those youtube videos where some guy goes around campus and interviews students. They will take some hot political topic and then read some quotes and claim Trump said them. Then these Intellectual Elite get on their soap box and talk about how bad trump is for saying that etc etc. Then the interviewer lets them know that those were actually statements by hillary, or barack, etc. Until that moment they were SURE... so SURE they were right and they were so much smarter than everyone else. Its elitism and thats what that derogatory term actually means. Its not intelligence if all you can do is parrot someone else's opinion. Anyone can memorize an encyclopedia. Pascals Law: A pressure applied to the surface of an enclosed fluid at rest, will be transmitted equally, and undiminished, throughout the fluid and to the walls of its container. I had to memorize that in nuclear power school. But until you actually understand it, and understand it so well you see it in everything fluid-dynamics, it is just words. Reciting them did not make me intellectual, it merely got me an A.
I think we are engaged on a couple of threads here now btw. Im pretty anti-religion, so I can see how the evolution topic can seem like a war on science. It is, and it isnt. It goes back to Neitzsche's remark about convictions and ignoring a truth that conflicts with a conviction. Nothing about evolution is contradictory to anything in the bible. Evolution does not, by itself, disprove god. The only thing it does is imply that the world did not get made in just 6 earth days, and organisms did not manifest out of thin air like magic. My favorite thing to tell someone who gets hung up over this is that if God made the laws of the universe, then being a perfect being (they love it when you build it up like this), he would be bound to follow the laws he created. One universal law is that energy/matter always takes the path of least resistance, and evolution, whether it be divinely guided or otherwise, is clearly that path of least resistance.
However, to refute your statement that you have never seen a multi-front war on science from the left is disingenuous. There have been/. articles about that very topic. Perhaps your definition of science and mine differ. To me the scientific process, peer review, the challenges that arise from your conclusion, are all science. Without that, its not science, its simply statements. There was a time, and in some parts it still exists, a broad left-wing cultural belief that it is OK to use money, power, and influence to push one scientific viewpoint over another. I am speaking of climate debate. Not the put-your-head-in-the-sand, earth is flat, type debate. I am talking about the scientists that have competing theories as to WHY things are going the way they are going and can the wrong correction potentially make a problem worse by overcorrecting. There are a large group that think its OK to fire them, defund any means they can use to speak to others, to silence them in the media and on social media. That is censorship. It is also a war on science. Because science is not about picking the right side. Its about encouraging criticism. To call anything 'settle science' when its constantly revealed that certain numbers were 'adjusted' to make the result fit with the theory. THAT also is a war on science. Its no different than declaring Adam appeared out of thin air 5k years ago, and someone saying 'but what about these humanoid fossils were radiologically dated to be 50k years old'? and then condemning all radiological dating to a specific problem Carbon dating has for things less than 20k years old. They are both a war on Science. Both sides think they are right and both sides are willing to abandon the fundamentals of science to get their THEORY to be accepted. I got news for you, sometimes its ALWAYS going to be a theory. In the navy I was a nuclear engineer. To this date, the idea that an unstable U-235 atom can absorb a thermal neutron, become unstable, and divide, releasing energy and imparting kinetic energy into its surrounding coolant, its still very much still THEORY. We build warships day in and day out relying heavily on this theory. Hell they still teach it using Bohrs model of the atom in the navy. IT doesnt mean that how it works cannot one day be better explained and theorized. It would be unfortunate if there were die-hard holdouts that still insist that the Bohrs model is the only true and accurate one.
Climatology was a soft science to begin with because there were too many moving parts that people barely understood in isolation let alone as part of a giant ecosystem. It stopped being science entirely when people who are not scientists turned it into a completely political type debate and the scientists, who also have lives outside of science and have their own political views, allowed it to happen. They themselves now sponsor censorship of any disagreement. What happens when the same behavior starts happening to other forms of science? We opened the door and justified it this one time as being OK. Thats called precedence and the imp
I should caution that throwing money at the problem doesn't solve it. Yes spending is needed, but spending wisely is needed more. I got really tired of reading/. articles about decade ago where high schools in california were installing $5k cappuccino machines for the spoiled little snowflakes. Buying a $5k cappuccino machine is not a wise expense. China has a cultural problem they are struggling to overcome. On my last cruise I met, at one of those veteran meet-and-greets, a couple that became professors and spent time in China teaching students how to think for themselves. This was literally their description of what China was trying to achieve. The biggest problem there is the desire to just copy someone else's work, design, program, etc is ingrained into their society. As a practitioner of traditional Taijiquan for 10yrs, I can see this in hindsight. Even their decades old method of teaching, by way of exact and precise copying the movements, epitomizes this issue. In order to change an entire society, for the goal to become a world leader in all things STEM, it will take an enormous amount of expense and I have no doubt meet a lot of resistance. Not everyone wants to be a wold leader in all things STEM.
Our education system not only gets underfunded, but they spend the funds they have on most things NOT STEM. They spend 3x the amount of time on social issues, social justice, whatever you want to call it, than they do teaching the topics that nearly everyone agree on. Math is pretty universal. I've never been called a heretic by suggesting 2+2=4, or that log10 scientific notation makes really big numbers easy to write, or that gravitational acceleration is 32ft/sec^2 (9.8m/sec^2). Teach someone that the build up to the separation of the Confederacy was based on the idea of State Sovereignty over Federalism and suddenly the revisionists want to beat you over the head about slavery as if all Confederate states were fighting to own slaves, we'll just ignore the part of the confederate constitution that actually prohibited the African slave trade.
Society is also hugely to blame for our education problem. Who gets the most notoriety in the US? Sports Atheletes, Actors, Actors that pretend to give a shit about people (we call them politicians), Music performers, and now YouTubers. We now have a fucking bunch of millennial and GenZ that think college is a waste of time. They just want to become rich playing Minecraft all day and recording it for Youtube so they can collect the millions of dollars they feel they are owed. That's a one-trick pony that, IMO, wont last forever. The testing standards keep lowering. I think they are lowering to cover up the fact that we are suddenly producing young adults that are mostly underachievers. What is now required is but a small subset of what used to be required. Sure new things come about they have to cover, so they push out the old requirements (physical ed for example, so now we have staggering obesity rates among teens). However if you mention year round school with some spring-break-like gaps 4 times a year; well, you could have suggested Auschwitz was justifiable and gotten less of a reaction. The push-back is insane despite countless studies that prove that the 2.5mo break every summer creates a back-slide of 30% of the previous years worth of training. In other words they spend 30% of the new year re-learning what they forgot over summer. And I am so tired of hearing this shit that the teachers are underpaid. That's such bullshit. Their salary is based on the 9.5mos a year they work. I can quote numbers but this is location subjective. In my area, a first year teacher right out of college with no experience makes about $42k a year salary for teaching 187 days. If you took a person working at a hospital, who held a position that does not require college education regardless whether or not they have it, they make between $15 and $19/hr depending on the years of experience. They earn 0.038hrs of vacation time for every hour worked (10 days per
You are delusional if you think this is a right wing problem. The vast majority of the kids I see going to private schools come from right wing families. I’m not even talking about super rich elite private schools. I am sure that they could find better ways to spend that $15,000 per year on tuition if they thought they had a choice. They are doing it so that their children have a decent shot at succeeding later in life. Three of the four largest and most successful private schools in my city (not even tier 3 in size) are religious in some sort of charter. Lexington Catholic, Lexington Christian Academy, Christ the King, etc. their academic program is far from substandard. They have the highest percentage of high school graduates qualifying for and in rolling into college.
So I do not think they are anti-education. Some do not like the anti-religious aspect of school, but a vast majority are doing it because of the substandard education that’s being offered up in public school that’s now deemed “good enough“. My daughter goes to public school. She’s finishing up her sophomore year. For the last four years I have been telling her that her writing skills are shit. I am constantly complaining about the quality of homework she hands him. Sometime she answers questions and doesn’t even use a complete sentence. Of course, she would argue back that the teacher said she doesn’t have to. Thinking I’m being lied to I reach out and ask the teachers. Guess what? She didn’t fucking have to! I am far from religious, but I’m starting to develop an anti-public education attitude based on these shitty reduced standards. In the early 80s, when I was in junior high, they didn’t call it middle school back then, you are not allowed to turn in any work that did not contain complete sentences. I do believe that the damn Scan-tron Machines that instantly graded those fill in the circle multiple choice test were the beginning of the stupidity. Sure it made it easy for the teachers, but recognizing the correct answer when told is not the same thing is actually knowing the correct answer.
You forgot to add political correctness in education. We don’t wanna hurt any feelings so we strive for mediocrity that way people don’t feel bad when somebody else does exemplary. Everybody gets a fucking metal for merely showing up. We no longer have contest to decide a winner, unless it’s sports. Some schools are even giving out the perfect attendance award even if the kid missed a day or two for a medical appointment or something along those lines. When you water down your reward system and make it have no merit, you are throwing away the carrot and that just leaves you with a damn stick. A lot of kids aren’t even motivated now. They no longer teach people cursive, handwriting is not even important, they don’t know how to address an envelope, or even write a letter. Everybody thought this no Child left behind program was going to be great. It was an impossible goal with severe penalties for not meeting them. So what did they do? They lowered all the standard so that everybody would magically qualify for being on “grade level“. No Child left behind really means no child gets ahead. Common core is the next iteration of the stupidity. Try to help your kid with math sometime. That scene from Incredibles 2 is 100% real, I have had that argument multiple times.
VW owners have been complaining that when they are in their car and make negative comments about various members of government, the vehicle abruptly changes course and drives them to the nearest police station while requesting intervention by the assigned political officer.
The biggest obstacle for low income, inner-city students, whom are cognitively capable, is that they enter the school system at 5 or 6 not even knowing their alphabet, or how to tie their shoes. The parents will often drop their kids off and if the kid is sick you can’t even find the parents. They deliberately give bullshit contact phone numbers because “that’s their free time“. They don’t give two shits about that kid except for the first and the 15th of the month. The school districts that implement an early start program, basically half-day preschool, have a better chance of getting these kids up to speed before they enter the primary education levels. And since they either feed them breakfast or lunch, it also guarantees they get at least one real meal a day.
Disclaimer: my wife was an elementary teacher for about eight years and primarily worked at inner-city schools.
Most importantly it gives them a chance at a normal life. When your kid scores in the bottom percentiles a proactive parent begins to investigate medical reasons such as dyslexia, ambliopia, etc. there is often something cognitive at play. Just sticking a kid in front of PBS would get them to 20% if there was not a cognitive factor. A less engaged parent, either by selfish choice or merely working 3 jobs as a single parent, will put these same kids in a situation where its just daycare. They grow up to be functionally incompetent to live on their own. By getting them to functional literacy, they now have a chance of a normal life; wife, kids, picket fence. It may not be a lavish life but being independent and not a street thug goes a long way toward self respect.
Considering how horribly wrong Siri gets my dictation I feel OK having an Apple device. Even if I were to say I’m gonna go blow up the school that dumb bitch would probably say something along “sorry I can’t find any shoe stores in your area“. She’s constantly fucking up pronouns. Singulars become plural, genders get swapped. Sometimes I will say him only to see it changed to they. I would understand if the words sounded similar to the word she got wrong. Nothing to be further from the case.
Remember the supposed ‘accident’ where google home called 911 during a domestic dispute? I found that unbelievable since 1) they dont interface with the PSTN, 2) they do not have a telephone number and therefore not registered with the 911 location database. That only leaves one option. Someone was listening and called the cops themselves.
Guess they wanted to rewrite the origin story. They’ll lose containment for sure. Then the genie is out of the bottle for good. Planet of the Apes and Secret of NIMH both come to mind.
public transportation - all flights now require a passport or Real ID. Prior to the Real ID act, they still had to produce a photo ID.
voting in more than 1 district -- there have been accounts, in areas where no identification is required, that have shown up to vote only to find that someone else has voted under their name, pretending to be them. Remember, assuming your old enough, the expression by Mayor Daley who said 'vote early and vote often' ? There is a video where a guy (white guy) showed up at a precinct in 2012 and said he was Eric Holder (the us attorney general at the time and definitely looks nothing like the guy in the video). He was given a ballot and pointed toward the election booth. Not requiring people to at least prove who they say they are with some form of photo id is crazy. Voting is a constitutional right for citizens, not just anyone. If you dont have a way to ensure only citizens are voting how can you secure the right? Last election they prosecuted someone who voted 8 times. There has also been cases where someone with dual residency of NY and FL (snow birds) voting in FL and turning in a NY absentee ballot. I'm not saying this is occurring to the magnitude that it is affecting the outcome of the election, but at the same time, simply requiring someone to also send in a copy of their photo ID with their ballot, or showing ID at the polling station, would clear that right up. Cant vote in FL if you show up and have a NY drivers license, they'll know you arent eligible to vote in that precinct.
my point about sudafed is that if its OK to force me to show ID to buy sudafed then how is it not OK to make someone show ID to vote? Even if its not a special ID, what if its just a DMV photo ID? If you claim constitutional rights, then let me remind you that my constitutional 2A right requires me to show a photo ID. You cannot pick and choose which rights do not require ID under the constitution. In order for me to assert my 5A right, I have to identify who I am. You cannot exert 5A right against self incrimination under the alias John Doe.
What if they merely required photo ID like Real ID? Surely they need to endure that I dont show up and vote for my neighbor while he is still at work. Im not hung up on a separate ID card but almost everyone has a photoID. Real ID tracks both birth certificate as well as ssn.
essentially everyone is going to need these new IDs to do any sort of travel, whether its to be a licensed driver or to be a passenger of public transportation. Why cant this new ID system, called Real ID, just be tied to voter registration.
this was the california DMV info on Real ID.
You will need a REAL ID driver license or ID card if you want to continue using your driver license or ID card to do any of the following:
Board a domestic flight starting October 1, 2020. Enter secure federal facilities or military bases starting October 1, 2020. (Note: Check with the federal facility/military base before your visit to verify their identification requirements.) Purchase firearms or ammunition. (Note: Check with the firearms dealer you plan to visit to verify their identification requirements)
according to the Act, it establishes proof of legitimate citizenship or legal residency. So It would be trivial to use Real ID as a means to prove voting eligibility.
1. scan the back of the card the same way you have to in order to buy sudafed. We already have MethCheck setup for this, just use that system. 2. Compare photo with person holding the card. 3. system confirms citizenship, or if local laws allow merely residents to vote on local elections like city counsel, present the appropriate voting ballot based on eligibility.
the same way I feel about having to require an ID to exercise my 2nd and 5th amendment rights. the last point is not really valid since only citizens are entitled to amendment rights and proving citizenship is essentially required to retain protection of them.
Going door to door wont work buy having the office be the same office for drivers license and car registration would work. You cannot get on the plane now without one of the new IDs. Not every state has even fully implemented this new ID system. My state is still a few months off. They claim, alternatively, you can show your passport. Now a US passport cost $150. It takes three weeks to process unless you want to pay even more money, and the hours of availability through the post office are even more egregious than those you cited. I would have no problem with making the requirement similar to those for flying a plane. Provide either one of the new ID cards or passport. I also would have no problem making them free for anybody with an EBT card, or if they brought in there 1040 federal filing showing that they made less than $50,000. Not the passport but this new ID system. I do not see why a voter ID needs to be a separate document as long as the identification establishes residency and citizenship.
Slashdot Mirror
umm did you read the whole article? it said had he not recanted he would have been burned alive. I think it would be interesting, if we ever get time travel, to go back and see these events first hand. I am thinking it got a lot closer than current history wants to admit. Like maybe stuck on a pile of wood and doused with oil, with the guy with the torch coming, kind of close. At one time it was taught he did get burned. So is it revisionist history or was the first version false? I cant say. I certainly cant look it up for the same reason I am having a hard time looking up articles we debated 12 yrs ago on slashdot seem to disappear. now that everything is digital it makes it pretty convenient to just change things without notice. The days of finding microfish articles are a thing of the past.
https://www.nytimes.com/1992/1...
here in the US there have been nurses who have been sued for malpractice and thrown under the bus by the hospital for making a mistake after being made to work back-to-back 12hr shifts. Another thing about vacation time here, is something called PTO (paid time off) and they give you a bank of days (sometimes 16) where both vacation and sick time is deducted from. If your sick more than 5 or 6 days in a year that can really trash your vacation time.
They just recently passed a law for overime compensation for salary employees but only if they make less than $47,476 annually. That doesnt keep them from working you 60hrs a week it just means they have to pay you. There is no limit how many hours they can make you work. Salary based jobs are usually goal based or project based. Meaning how many hours you work is dependent on how long it takes you to complete the tasks. Its not uncommon to find ones self working well past 40hrs to get all the tasks completed. Normally, these things are handled through the markets because people leave for better jobs. However, when the economy takes a shit, the employers do not get that sort of adjustment as there isnt an abundance of better jobs. It also does nothing for the shitty job itself, they seem to still exist, they just end up with a ton of turnover and for whatever reason the employer does not self-examine that its them thats the problem.
btw how the hell can you claim austrailia doesnt have race problems. I was in perth on a port visit on the USS Abraham lincoln. While in port I had a cabbie get out of his car and chase an aborigonie (spelling) out of the park where he was sleeping. He yelled 'get the hell out of here blackie!'. That doesnt exactly scream no race problem.
inner-city is not a euphamism for race. there are equal number of white/black in the inner-city schools. Inner-city schools are people that live in areas that are mostly zoned industrial. This means the housing is fairly inexpensive. Why its inexpensive is because its not exactly the nicests areas. Crime is fairly high and safety is a serious concern. The areas are usually dilapidated / run down. What they have in common is that the kids are disadvantaged, but its not always because they just drew the short straw. In at least half the cases, they are disadvantaged because the parents are only keeping the kid because it gets them more stipends. They often rarely take care of them, there are social workers permanently assigned to the school system in order to handle the number of cases of neglect. In many cases heroin addiction is the cause of the kids being in this situation. What money the parents make gets spent on heroin instead of food and clothing. If it wasnt for certain programs that require the money to be spent on actual food items like WIC and EBT, these kids would be splitting a can of soup between 4 kids. It has nothing to do with race. Its about, in half the cases, self-imposed poverty because the parents have a serious heroin problem.
their salary for only working 187 days per year is significantly higher than average for my area. Thats why I gave a comparison. To pay a teacher with only 10yrs experience $59k, only work 187 days (ok add at MOST 15 more days) instead of the 250 work days out of the year the average person works. The University here puts out want ads for jobs. They want someone with a Masters degree in Mechanical Engineering and they are only willing to pay $58k a year; and that job expects, at a minimum, a 60hr week commitment. So YES, teachers are over paid by comparison to the rest of everyone else. There is no reason why they should be special. For the record a decent 2500 sq ft house costs less than $225k in this area. The problem with education has nothing to do with salary, and if you think by merely doubling their salary will fix the problems in education, you will have squandered millions. The original poster of this thread made a comparison to china. Yet in all their supposed superiority, their teachers, even accounting for the differences in currency, and average salary, make a fraction of what our teachers make. So no, teachers actually do NOT need a raise to solve our problem in education. I would NOT feel bad making them put in 50hrs per week for 47 weeks out of the year for the exact same salary (roughly 235 days minus a couple holidays and elections that fell outside those weeks off). I refuse to accept an argument where I am told my salary is OK in the same breath that a teacher is considered 'underpaid' for working HALF of the time I put into work. When you find a way to double my salary, then fine, I'll give you the argument about teachers being underpaid.
from what I've read, S Korea is the exception. They are starting to get a large problem of teens/young adults that are so addicted to their online lives they forget to do things like -- feed their baby for 6 days. Sadly I am starting to see some of those coming out of highschool going down this path as well. Throwing their lives away just to jack into the matrix.
my first run-in with the words conservative vs liberal had nothing to do with anything other than government spending. A conservative would not spend money on 'research' to learn if chimpanzees can become addicted to nicotine or if primates get depressed after masturbating 3 times a week. A liberal actually did spend money on both those studies. Money that could be used, instead, on lowering the cost of healthcare or lowering the cost of childcare for lower income earners through some sort of subsidy. It is only because most conservatives were voting republican (not all), and most liberals were voting democrat (not all), and because we, for some reason, have to have a 2 party system that we feel the need to divide everyone into, that this term means nothing about spending other people's money willy-nilly. It used to be possible to be conservative and be a democrat (they used to be called blue-dog democrats). They stood for what they saw as workers rights over corporate abuses, but at the same time didnt think it was the governments job to be a nanny state. At some point they started drawing a line in the sand and demanded people be on one side or the other. Whats your stance on abortion? You cant be for womens rights and be against the government telling you what you can and cannot do in your free time.. that sort of thing. This polarization started in the mid 90s and, like a snowball, it just keeps getting more dangerous.
i guess that depends on if god lives inside or outside this universe, or if he is the universe itself. If he lives outside the universe then sure. But if he lives inside it, or is the universe, then he is bound to live by the rules he created. Only an imperfect person born into sin would see it as a right to get to break your own laws. A perfect being is simply incapable. The term sin literally means to miss the mark, ie imperfect. For if god were to break his own rules, he would be guilty of sin, something he is incapable of. God, being the perfect being he is, will always do things the most efficient, non wasteful method possible. To an eternal being 1 day, 5 billion years, it does not matter as long as its the best way.
thats usually how i respond to that answer. Most of the time they at least concede its possible, and a lack of understanding does not equate to absolute faith over alleged fact. After all, they did ex-communicate Galileo for suggesting the earth revolved around the sun. Burned him alive in fact. To put it in perspective they didnt ex-communicate Hitler despite the atrocities. If you asked the same people their view of the earth orbiting the sun they would agree we all have the same understanding and suggesting the sun revolves around the earth seems silly. What changed over the past 500 years? It used to be as much heresy as evolutionary steps are today. Yet today they have accepted that the earth, does in fact, orbit around the sun. Neither either prove or disprove god. What happened and why it happened are not the same topic. Science only looks at the what, and sometimes theorizes about the why, but without observation, the why is often a guess.
I'm pretty sure the term 'intellectual elite' has nothing to do with education or a condemnation of education. I hope you haven't somehow derived that people at trump rallys are anti-education. The term implies something entirely different. Elitism is a new way to saying looking down your nose at someone (I used to hear that expression a lot as a child, I rarely hear it now). The expression draws the image of someone with their nose up in the air because they are too good to be associating with the likes of you. It dates back to aristocracy. There are many ways someone can think they are better than you
1) race - some people think they belong to a superior race and that trait makes them better than others
2) money - nothing divides the world into clasism or caste based society more so than money. Merely having money causes those who came by it without working for it to often acquire a sense of superiority. The paid staff that wait on your every beckon call feeds this and amplifies it.
3) religion - the belief in whether you burn in hell or not has caused many to feel that they are superior because they are among those that are 'right' and will be vindicated when those that picked 'wrong' are unmercifully punished for it.
4) Intelligence - people can begin to act like a complete douche when they think they are significantly smarter than some other person or group.
Intellectual Elite actually implies someone THINKS they are so much better than everyone else because they THINK they are so much smarter. They arent ACTUALLY smarter, the merely assume they are. Because anyone who does not agree with 100% of everything they say MUST be less intelligent and therefore not worthy to vote because they are just too stupid to have that right/responsibility. Its not a condemnation of education. Its a condemnation of Elitism. The reality is that most of the people that fall into this critisism are actually NOT overly intellectual in nature. For the most part they actually do not do independent thought very well at all. They rely heavily on GroupThink and will tow the GroupThink line on every topic despite how poor their understanding of it actually is. Nothing could exemplify how dangerous GroupThink is better than those youtube videos where some guy goes around campus and interviews students. They will take some hot political topic and then read some quotes and claim Trump said them. Then these Intellectual Elite get on their soap box and talk about how bad trump is for saying that etc etc. Then the interviewer lets them know that those were actually statements by hillary, or barack, etc. Until that moment they were SURE... so SURE they were right and they were so much smarter than everyone else. Its elitism and thats what that derogatory term actually means. Its not intelligence if all you can do is parrot someone else's opinion. Anyone can memorize an encyclopedia. Pascals Law: A pressure applied to the surface of an enclosed fluid at rest, will be transmitted equally, and undiminished, throughout the fluid and to the walls of its container. I had to memorize that in nuclear power school. But until you actually understand it, and understand it so well you see it in everything fluid-dynamics, it is just words. Reciting them did not make me intellectual, it merely got me an A.
I think we are engaged on a couple of threads here now btw. Im pretty anti-religion, so I can see how the evolution topic can seem like a war on science. It is, and it isnt. It goes back to Neitzsche's remark about convictions and ignoring a truth that conflicts with a conviction. Nothing about evolution is contradictory to anything in the bible. Evolution does not, by itself, disprove god. The only thing it does is imply that the world did not get made in just 6 earth days, and organisms did not manifest out of thin air like magic. My favorite thing to tell someone who gets hung up over this is that if God made the laws of the universe, then being a perfect being (they love it when you build it up like this), he would be bound to follow the laws he created. One universal law is that energy/matter always takes the path of least resistance, and evolution, whether it be divinely guided or otherwise, is clearly that path of least resistance.
However, to refute your statement that you have never seen a multi-front war on science from the left is disingenuous. There have been /. articles about that very topic. Perhaps your definition of science and mine differ. To me the scientific process, peer review, the challenges that arise from your conclusion, are all science. Without that, its not science, its simply statements. There was a time, and in some parts it still exists, a broad left-wing cultural belief that it is OK to use money, power, and influence to push one scientific viewpoint over another. I am speaking of climate debate. Not the put-your-head-in-the-sand, earth is flat, type debate. I am talking about the scientists that have competing theories as to WHY things are going the way they are going and can the wrong correction potentially make a problem worse by overcorrecting. There are a large group that think its OK to fire them, defund any means they can use to speak to others, to silence them in the media and on social media. That is censorship. It is also a war on science. Because science is not about picking the right side. Its about encouraging criticism. To call anything 'settle science' when its constantly revealed that certain numbers were 'adjusted' to make the result fit with the theory. THAT also is a war on science. Its no different than declaring Adam appeared out of thin air 5k years ago, and someone saying 'but what about these humanoid fossils were radiologically dated to be 50k years old'? and then condemning all radiological dating to a specific problem Carbon dating has for things less than 20k years old. They are both a war on Science. Both sides think they are right and both sides are willing to abandon the fundamentals of science to get their THEORY to be accepted. I got news for you, sometimes its ALWAYS going to be a theory. In the navy I was a nuclear engineer. To this date, the idea that an unstable U-235 atom can absorb a thermal neutron, become unstable, and divide, releasing energy and imparting kinetic energy into its surrounding coolant, its still very much still THEORY. We build warships day in and day out relying heavily on this theory. Hell they still teach it using Bohrs model of the atom in the navy. IT doesnt mean that how it works cannot one day be better explained and theorized. It would be unfortunate if there were die-hard holdouts that still insist that the Bohrs model is the only true and accurate one.
Climatology was a soft science to begin with because there were too many moving parts that people barely understood in isolation let alone as part of a giant ecosystem. It stopped being science entirely when people who are not scientists turned it into a completely political type debate and the scientists, who also have lives outside of science and have their own political views, allowed it to happen. They themselves now sponsor censorship of any disagreement. What happens when the same behavior starts happening to other forms of science? We opened the door and justified it this one time as being OK. Thats called precedence and the imp
I should caution that throwing money at the problem doesn't solve it. Yes spending is needed, but spending wisely is needed more. I got really tired of reading /. articles about decade ago where high schools in california were installing $5k cappuccino machines for the spoiled little snowflakes. Buying a $5k cappuccino machine is not a wise expense. China has a cultural problem they are struggling to overcome. On my last cruise I met, at one of those veteran meet-and-greets, a couple that became professors and spent time in China teaching students how to think for themselves. This was literally their description of what China was trying to achieve. The biggest problem there is the desire to just copy someone else's work, design, program, etc is ingrained into their society. As a practitioner of traditional Taijiquan for 10yrs, I can see this in hindsight. Even their decades old method of teaching, by way of exact and precise copying the movements, epitomizes this issue. In order to change an entire society, for the goal to become a world leader in all things STEM, it will take an enormous amount of expense and I have no doubt meet a lot of resistance. Not everyone wants to be a wold leader in all things STEM.
Our education system not only gets underfunded, but they spend the funds they have on most things NOT STEM. They spend 3x the amount of time on social issues, social justice, whatever you want to call it, than they do teaching the topics that nearly everyone agree on. Math is pretty universal. I've never been called a heretic by suggesting 2+2=4, or that log10 scientific notation makes really big numbers easy to write, or that gravitational acceleration is 32ft/sec^2 (9.8m/sec^2). Teach someone that the build up to the separation of the Confederacy was based on the idea of State Sovereignty over Federalism and suddenly the revisionists want to beat you over the head about slavery as if all Confederate states were fighting to own slaves, we'll just ignore the part of the confederate constitution that actually prohibited the African slave trade.
Society is also hugely to blame for our education problem. Who gets the most notoriety in the US? Sports Atheletes, Actors, Actors that pretend to give a shit about people (we call them politicians), Music performers, and now YouTubers. We now have a fucking bunch of millennial and GenZ that think college is a waste of time. They just want to become rich playing Minecraft all day and recording it for Youtube so they can collect the millions of dollars they feel they are owed. That's a one-trick pony that, IMO, wont last forever. The testing standards keep lowering. I think they are lowering to cover up the fact that we are suddenly producing young adults that are mostly underachievers. What is now required is but a small subset of what used to be required. Sure new things come about they have to cover, so they push out the old requirements (physical ed for example, so now we have staggering obesity rates among teens). However if you mention year round school with some spring-break-like gaps 4 times a year; well, you could have suggested Auschwitz was justifiable and gotten less of a reaction. The push-back is insane despite countless studies that prove that the 2.5mo break every summer creates a back-slide of 30% of the previous years worth of training. In other words they spend 30% of the new year re-learning what they forgot over summer. And I am so tired of hearing this shit that the teachers are underpaid. That's such bullshit. Their salary is based on the 9.5mos a year they work. I can quote numbers but this is location subjective. In my area, a first year teacher right out of college with no experience makes about $42k a year salary for teaching 187 days. If you took a person working at a hospital, who held a position that does not require college education regardless whether or not they have it, they make between $15 and $19/hr depending on the years of experience. They earn 0.038hrs of vacation time for every hour worked (10 days per
You are delusional if you think this is a right wing problem. The vast majority of the kids I see going to private schools come from right wing families. I’m not even talking about super rich elite private schools. I am sure that they could find better ways to spend that $15,000 per year on tuition if they thought they had a choice. They are doing it so that their children have a decent shot at succeeding later in life. Three of the four largest and most successful private schools in my city (not even tier 3 in size) are religious in some sort of charter. Lexington Catholic, Lexington Christian Academy, Christ the King, etc. their academic program is far from substandard. They have the highest percentage of high school graduates qualifying for and in rolling into college.
So I do not think they are anti-education. Some do not like the anti-religious aspect of school, but a vast majority are doing it because of the substandard education that’s being offered up in public school that’s now deemed “good enough“. My daughter goes to public school. She’s finishing up her sophomore year. For the last four years I have been telling her that her writing skills are shit. I am constantly complaining about the quality of homework she hands him. Sometime she answers questions and doesn’t even use a complete sentence. Of course, she would argue back that the teacher said she doesn’t have to. Thinking I’m being lied to I reach out and ask the teachers. Guess what? She didn’t fucking have to! I am far from religious, but I’m starting to develop an anti-public education attitude based on these shitty reduced standards. In the early 80s, when I was in junior high, they didn’t call it middle school back then, you are not allowed to turn in any work that did not contain complete sentences. I do believe that the damn Scan-tron Machines that instantly graded those fill in the circle multiple choice test were the beginning of the stupidity. Sure it made it easy for the teachers, but recognizing the correct answer when told is not the same thing is actually knowing the correct answer.
You forgot to add political correctness in education. We don’t wanna hurt any feelings so we strive for mediocrity that way people don’t feel bad when somebody else does exemplary. Everybody gets a fucking metal for merely showing up. We no longer have contest to decide a winner, unless it’s sports. Some schools are even giving out the perfect attendance award even if the kid missed a day or two for a medical appointment or something along those lines. When you water down your reward system and make it have no merit, you are throwing away the carrot and that just leaves you with a damn stick. A lot of kids aren’t even motivated now. They no longer teach people cursive, handwriting is not even important, they don’t know how to address an envelope, or even write a letter. Everybody thought this no Child left behind program was going to be great. It was an impossible goal with severe penalties for not meeting them. So what did they do? They lowered all the standard so that everybody would magically qualify for being on “grade level“. No Child left behind really means no child gets ahead. Common core is the next iteration of the stupidity. Try to help your kid with math sometime. That scene from Incredibles 2 is 100% real, I have had that argument multiple times.
VW owners have been complaining that when they are in their car and make negative comments about various members of government, the vehicle abruptly changes course and drives them to the nearest police station while requesting intervention by the assigned political officer.
The biggest obstacle for low income, inner-city students, whom are cognitively capable, is that they enter the school system at 5 or 6 not even knowing their alphabet, or how to tie their shoes. The parents will often drop their kids off and if the kid is sick you can’t even find the parents. They deliberately give bullshit contact phone numbers because “that’s their free time“. They don’t give two shits about that kid except for the first and the 15th of the month. The school districts that implement an early start program, basically half-day preschool, have a better chance of getting these kids up to speed before they enter the primary education levels. And since they either feed them breakfast or lunch, it also guarantees they get at least one real meal a day.
Disclaimer: my wife was an elementary teacher for about eight years and primarily worked at inner-city schools.
Most importantly it gives them a chance at a normal life. When your kid scores in the bottom percentiles a proactive parent begins to investigate medical reasons such as dyslexia, ambliopia, etc. there is often something cognitive at play. Just sticking a kid in front of PBS would get them to 20% if there was not a cognitive factor. A less engaged parent, either by selfish choice or merely working 3 jobs as a single parent, will put these same kids in a situation where its just daycare. They grow up to be functionally incompetent to live on their own. By getting them to functional literacy, they now have a chance of a normal life; wife, kids, picket fence. It may not be a lavish life but being independent and not a street thug goes a long way toward self respect.
Considering how horribly wrong Siri gets my dictation I feel OK having an Apple device. Even if I were to say I’m gonna go blow up the school that dumb bitch would probably say something along “sorry I can’t find any shoe stores in your area“. She’s constantly fucking up pronouns. Singulars become plural, genders get swapped. Sometimes I will say him only to see it changed to they. I would understand if the words sounded similar to the word she got wrong. Nothing to be further from the case.
Remember the supposed ‘accident’ where google home called 911 during a domestic dispute? I found that unbelievable since 1) they dont interface with the PSTN, 2) they do not have a telephone number and therefore not registered with the 911 location database. That only leaves one option. Someone was listening and called the cops themselves.
Guess they wanted to rewrite the origin story. They’ll lose containment for sure. Then the genie is out of the bottle for good. Planet of the Apes and Secret of NIMH both come to mind.
public transportation - all flights now require a passport or Real ID. Prior to the Real ID act, they still had to produce a photo ID.
voting in more than 1 district -- there have been accounts, in areas where no identification is required, that have shown up to vote only to find that someone else has voted under their name, pretending to be them. Remember, assuming your old enough, the expression by Mayor Daley who said 'vote early and vote often' ? There is a video where a guy (white guy) showed up at a precinct in 2012 and said he was Eric Holder (the us attorney general at the time and definitely looks nothing like the guy in the video). He was given a ballot and pointed toward the election booth. Not requiring people to at least prove who they say they are with some form of photo id is crazy. Voting is a constitutional right for citizens, not just anyone. If you dont have a way to ensure only citizens are voting how can you secure the right? Last election they prosecuted someone who voted 8 times. There has also been cases where someone with dual residency of NY and FL (snow birds) voting in FL and turning in a NY absentee ballot. I'm not saying this is occurring to the magnitude that it is affecting the outcome of the election, but at the same time, simply requiring someone to also send in a copy of their photo ID with their ballot, or showing ID at the polling station, would clear that right up. Cant vote in FL if you show up and have a NY drivers license, they'll know you arent eligible to vote in that precinct.
my point about sudafed is that if its OK to force me to show ID to buy sudafed then how is it not OK to make someone show ID to vote? Even if its not a special ID, what if its just a DMV photo ID? If you claim constitutional rights, then let me remind you that my constitutional 2A right requires me to show a photo ID. You cannot pick and choose which rights do not require ID under the constitution. In order for me to assert my 5A right, I have to identify who I am. You cannot exert 5A right against self incrimination under the alias John Doe.
What if they merely required photo ID like Real ID? Surely they need to endure that I dont show up and vote for my neighbor while he is still at work. Im not hung up on a separate ID card but almost everyone has a photoID. Real ID tracks both birth certificate as well as ssn.
essentially everyone is going to need these new IDs to do any sort of travel, whether its to be a licensed driver or to be a passenger of public transportation. Why cant this new ID system, called Real ID, just be tied to voter registration.
this was the california DMV info on Real ID.
You will need a REAL ID driver license or ID card if you want to continue using your driver license or ID card to do any of the following:
Board a domestic flight starting October 1, 2020.
Enter secure federal facilities or military bases starting October 1, 2020. (Note: Check with the federal facility/military base before your visit to verify their identification requirements.)
Purchase firearms or ammunition. (Note: Check with the firearms dealer you plan to visit to verify their identification requirements)
according to the Act, it establishes proof of legitimate citizenship or legal residency. So It would be trivial to use Real ID as a means to prove voting eligibility.
1. scan the back of the card the same way you have to in order to buy sudafed. We already have MethCheck setup for this, just use that system.
2. Compare photo with person holding the card.
3. system confirms citizenship, or if local laws allow merely residents to vote on local elections like city counsel, present the appropriate voting ballot based on eligibility.
seems fairly easy
the same way I feel about having to require an ID to exercise my 2nd and 5th amendment rights. the last point is not really valid since only citizens are entitled to amendment rights and proving citizenship is essentially required to retain protection of them.
Going door to door wont work buy having the office be the same office for drivers license and car registration would work. You cannot get on the plane now without one of the new IDs. Not every state has even fully implemented this new ID system. My state is still a few months off. They claim, alternatively, you can show your passport. Now a US passport cost $150. It takes three weeks to process unless you want to pay even more money, and the hours of availability through the post office are even more egregious than those you cited. I would have no problem with making the requirement similar to those for flying a plane. Provide either one of the new ID cards or passport. I also would have no problem making them free for anybody with an EBT card, or if they brought in there 1040 federal filing showing that they made less than $50,000. Not the passport but this new ID system. I do not see why a voter ID needs to be a separate document as long as the identification establishes residency and citizenship.