• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

18 REASONS THE U.S. EDUCATION SYSTEM IS FAILING

Better to let all the students escape the burning building, than forcing them to try to put out the fire trapped in the building because of economic reasons. As for college expenses, there are plenty of price points but consider that many in college shouldn't be there or can do better without it. $5k/year isn't that expensive for someone willing to work.
I work with a lot of kids who are starting out in serious debt, and it isn't because they made a stupid choice or picked the wrong school. It's a real problem.
 
I work with a lot of kids who are starting out in serious debt, and it isn't because they made a stupid choice or picked the wrong school. It's a real problem.
If they are starting out in serious debt, then they aren't kids and they apparently did very poorly in math. While working to drive the costs out of sports factories and bloated staff, and reducing the amount of easy money jacking up tuition well beyond the rate of inflation creating all this debt, maybe we can require some level of aptitude and have the student create a plan before funding all these students, many who should not even be in school due to lack of need in their chosen profession or aptitude. Save college for those who want is, not those looking to find themselves.

Take a look at the budget of your nearest large state university and then come back and say that the money is well spent and that the tuition cost is justified.
 
If they are starting out in serious debt, then they aren't kids and they apparently did very poorly in math. While working to drive the costs out of sports factories and bloated staff, and reducing the amount of easy money jacking up tuition well beyond the rate of inflation creating all this debt, maybe we can require some level of aptitude and have the student create a plan before funding all these students, many who should not even be in school due to lack of need in their chosen profession or aptitude. Save college for those who want is, not those looking to find themselves.

Take a look at the budget of your nearest large state university and then come back and say that the money is well spent and that the tuition cost is justified.
I doubt that this discussion will change either of our opinions.
 
I doubt that this discussion will change either of our opinions.
I'm not clear you could describe either of our opinions to know that, unless the cynicism has calcified.
 
I'm not clear you could describe either of our opinions to know that, unless the cynicism has calcified.
I just don't really care to convince the unconvincable that much anymore. There is literally no amount of time, energy, or linked articles that will budge your preferred opinion an inch. I mean, maybe sometimes, just to do it, but less often than I used to.
 
I just don't really care to convince the unconvincable that much anymore. There is literally no amount of time, energy, or linked articles that will budge your preferred opinion an inch. I mean, maybe sometimes, just to do it, but less often than I used to.
Since I'm a reasonable person, I can only conclude that calcification has completed. So be it.

Good day.
 
Being anti-intellectual and distrusting the experts, those who did get an education, is a sign of manhood and a rite of passage for being a proper conservatives these days.

Yeah, right - in fact, the Rabid-Right. I gather from what you say above that no woman can be a proper-conservative?

Typical. Soooooo typical of that mindless breed.

Politics is an open-discussion not a "gifted nomenclature" which, like a cloak, you can spread around your mind. The colour of which is obvious so everybody knows "where you are coming from politically".

That is, a great-band of nitwits who have enriched themselves mindlessly ever since Ronnie RayGun lowered upper-income taxation in 1981 (and following Replicant PotUSes lowered even further)!

So, now, with their easily untaxed billions, they will want to see Trump once again as "PotUS" whereupon they can prance-around-with-obvious-pride whilst making even more billions ...
 
I just don't really care to convince the unconvincable that much anymore. There is literally no amount of time, energy, or linked articles that will budge your preferred opinion an inch. I mean, maybe sometimes, just to do it, but less often than I used to.

Well, you see, the Rabid Right is constituted typically with hard-headed people who THINK that any political discussion that would change the existing (dishonest and unfair) system of taxation is worthless.

So, you see, they need not obtain any argument to defend their position. Ipso facto, they are right and thus Right ...
 
JUST THE FACTS, MA'AM*

From here: How Many Americans Have a College Degree?



That 44% is not nearly enough!
If 90% of people have an IQ of less than 120 ( simple fact ) isn't it dangerous for the State to allow them to become too smart ?

Apart from them becoming less controllable , a huge number will begin to think that they are clever and can problem solve . Which they can only do in simple matters .

In terms of efficiency , pragmatism etc surely we need more crafts people with far less enquiring minds ?

If around 1% are to continue to best guide the Sheeple , it is not in anybodies interest to have too big a flock or big ideas flock leaders .

So 44% is dangerously high . Feel sure that any decent Globalist would wholeheartedly support this common sense position .
 
Well, you see, the Rabid Right is constituted typically with hard-headed people who THINK that any political discussion that would change the existing (dishonest and unfair) system of taxation is worthless.

So, you see, they need not obtain any argument to defend their position. Ipso facto, they are right and thus Right ...

It's another example of why a two tribe system generally can't work at the national level. It has already contributed to a civil war and an insurrection.
 
COCKS OF THE WALK

It's another example of why a two tribe system generally can't work at the national level. It has already contributed to a civil war and an insurrection.

Well, I live in France where the "two-tribe" (Left and Right) system is also predominant. And whyzzat?

Because before "two-tribe politic" any number more than two required a highly-multiple majority of parties to pass legislation. That can be tantamount to a "miracle" given the wide differences in political opinion that even "alike" parties (that is, are similar) may come to a bitter stand-off due to some arcane differences of opinion. (A prime example of that is Italy where governments break-apart easily and are very difficult to build amongst Italy's multiple party-political-system.)

The two-party system has its constraints, but they are perhaps less "constraining" than a country run by multiple parties ... especially because of the "Latin-males" (France, Italy, Spain and Portugal). They have a strong tendency to think they are cocks-of-the-walk ...
 
COCKS OF THE WALK



Well, I live in France where the "two-tribe" (Left and Right) system is also predominant. And whyzzat?

Because before "two-tribe politic" any number more than two required a highly-multiple majority of parties to pass legislation. That can be tantamount to a "miracle" given the wide differences in political opinion that even "alike" parties (that is, are similar) may come to a bitter stand-off due to some arcane differences of opinion. (A prime example of that is Italy where governments break-apart easily and are very difficult to build amongst Italy's multiple party-political-system.)

The two-party system has its constraints, but they are perhaps less "constraining" than a country run by multiple parties ... especially because of the "Latin-males" (France, Italy, Spain and Portugal). They have a strong tendency to think they are cocks-of-the-walk ...
I'm tired of it. I have only one choice because one of the two parties has gone batshit insane. The other party's predominate selling point is that they aren't nutters who fellate an authoritarian game show host. It's a ****ed up choice.
 
If 90% of people have an IQ of less than 120 ( simple fact ) isn't it dangerous for the State to allow them to become too smart ?

Apart from them becoming less controllable , a huge number will begin to think that they are clever and can problem solve . Which they can only do in simple matters .

In terms of efficiency , pragmatism etc surely we need more crafts people with far less enquiring minds ?


If around 1% are to continue to best guide the Sheeple , it is not in anybodies interest to have too big a flock or big ideas flock leaders .

So 44% is dangerously high . Feel sure that any decent Globalist would wholeheartedly support this common sense position .

You are playing with some dangerous questions.

Humanity must be taken at its face value. That is, how well or badly humans behave in any given circumstance. And the crime-rate points very clearly that "living-in-America" has a problem. A very deep problem that nobody seems to really care about - until, of course, crime happens to them!

The matter is extremely complex because if crime is more prevalent in the US than, say, Europe (both comparable entities) then we should be asking ourselves "Why?" In fact, both the US and the EU have comparable overall crime-rates, for instance, as regards "murders" (from here):

STATEuropean UnionUnited States
Murders > WHO1.96
Ranked 130th.
5.6
Ranked 88th. 3 times more than European Union
Murders > Per 100,000 people1.71
Ranked 101st.
5.9
Ranked 63th. 3 times more than European Union

And why are both so very high in the rankings - 130 the US and 101 the EU - when both have very different political systems though their economies are remarkably similar in nature ... ?
 
Being anti-intellectual and distrusting the experts, those who did get an education, is a sign of manhood and a rite of passage for being a proper conservatives these days.

I frankly do not think that those who believe an economic system must by financially unfair (with millions and billions of dollars going to so few are being "fair". In fact, just the opposite. They are hungry wolves.

There are some conservatives on earth who do not think that "making a megabuck" and taking most of it home is "fair and equitable".

The issue is one of mind-set. The accumulation of capital - and making sure that the world knows how much - is a very, very specially American habit. Obviously, anyone who makes a great deal of moulah must be very, very clever.

But that as an explanation is not enough. Because and Demand for goods/services in a nation is dependent upon the entire population. Which means what?

That in this game called "economics" we are all players. But, according the rules we make, some can be much-much richer players than others. And, I just don't see why that should happen. I cannot see or understand its "basic good-sense" because, obviously, I think there is none. (Are you a happier person if you've got 100-megabucks instead of only 10-megabucks?)

Amassing one helluva lottah moulah is of what intrinsic value? Were your Net Worth be 2/3 megabucks or 2/3 gigabucks is of no real consequence whatsoever!

My Point: It is abominably unfair that any country has such a small number of the ultra-rich when it also has so great a percentage living at or below the Poverty Threshold ($25K a year for a family of four). From here:
Around 1,456,336 households in America have $10 million or more in net worth. That's 1.13% of American households.
Whilst from here:
How many families are in poverty in the US 2020?

From February to June 2020: The number of non-elderly individuals living in families with combined weekly earnings below the poverty line rose by 14.1 million (28 percent), from 51.0 million [in 2019] to 65.1 million. (Jul 15, 2020)

PS: Yes, the numbers for poor-families in 2020 were exacerbated by Covid that was just beginning to be a great problem.
 
Obviously, anyone who makes a great deal of moulah must be very, very clever.
I agree with everything you say in that post except this sentence. SOME people who make a great deal of moulah are very, very clever. But this idea that anyone with a lot of money must have gotten there because they must necessarily be smart, or virtuous, or hard-working, etc... is also a very American belief.

But the reality is that many people who get there do so because they were lucky (at the right place at the right time, etc...), many inherited it, many others have stolen it or used other unsavory means to get it, etc...
 
It’s a vicious cycle. Poverty breeds those attitudes, and those attitudes in turn breed more poverty.

How qould you propose fixing the problem?
Parents don't have to be rich to instill in their children the desire to succeed in school.
 
I have no idea of how to protect kids from households with drugs, alcohol, immature parents, or violence problems?

We can guarantee well funded education programs, but we can't control the environment that kids have to grow up in for the most part.
As long as a substantial number of people who live in poverty and have the types of problems you mentioned have children the societal and educational problems will always exist. There's no substitute for who one's parents are and the values and discipline they instill in them.
 
Sure they have, but not with the sheer numbers of today. The problem grows along with the population.
It's even more extreme today as the number of children people have is inversely proportional to wealth.
 
The above title from here: 18 REASONS THE U.S. EDUCATION SYSTEM IS FAILING

Excerpt:



Where there's a common will there is also a way.

America does not yet have that common-will for Education. And in this brave-new-world of Services Industry jobs that will sustain the economy it is key to a national solution for all ...
Thanks, mon ami. Why don't you fix things in France where racism is out of control and where you've had 30k new covid cases in the past 24 hours then come back and talk to us about who's country is more messed up?
 
This is amazing! I searched this thread for 'curio' and the words 'curious' and 'curiosity' do not turn up.

My mother sent me to a Catholic elementary school and had taught me to read when I was 3. But she never suggested any books. The nuns did not teach science. Fortunately I stumbled across science fiction in 4th grade. The media environment is totally different today.

I would rather find YouTube videos than listen to a teacher today. The video can be sped up to 150% and still understood.

But how are 6 yr olds supposed to tell great books and videos from trash? I personally do not trust educational institutions to use technology well. They are stuck with tradition and their own economic interests.
 
Back
Top Bottom