• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • 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!

Obama's anti-expulsion policy increases school violence

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
President Barack Obama’s pressure on public schools to limit the number of suspensions and expulsions for minorities has resulted in a sharp increase in violence for a school district in Wisconsin.

Since the Milwaukee schools decided to abide by the president’s mandate, there have been 31,000 reports of fighting or aggressive behavior.

Stacy Washington of Project 21 (The National Leadership Network of Black Conservatives) argues that the White House never bothered to investigate the situation before directing schools to follow the president’s alleged “anti-discrimination” policy.
GOPUSA ? Obama's anti-expulsion policy increases school violence
 

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
President Barack Obama’s pressure on public schools to limit the number of suspensions and expulsions for minorities has resulted in a sharp increase in violence for a school district in Wisconsin.

Since the Milwaukee schools decided to abide by the president’s mandate, there have been 31,000 reports of fighting or aggressive behavior.

Stacy Washington of Project 21 (The National Leadership Network of Black Conservatives) argues that the White House never bothered to investigate the situation before directing schools to follow the president’s alleged “anti-discrimination” policy.
GOPUSA ? Obama's anti-expulsion policy increases school violence

Seems to me that instead of kicking kids out and making lifelong criminals of them, the schools need to figure out how to keep them busy enough to where the kids don't have time for foolishness...and for that, the schools need to be properly funded.

Of course, in right-wing wacko world, it's a heck of a lot better to kick the kids out and make lifelong criminals out of them.
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Seems to me that instead of kicking kids out and making lifelong criminals of them, the schools need to figure out how to keep them busy enough to where the kids don't have time for foolishness...
There are lots of after-school programs, but this is about violence "during" school, not after.
and for that, the schools need to be properly funded.
It's not the responsibility, IMHO, of tax payers to pay for the rearing of other people's kids. I used to give a tremendous amount of time (when my kids were involved) and I still give a lot of money to organizations that provide help to parents that ask for it and participate with their kids, like Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, and a local kids athletics group. Again, there's lots of programs available already that are already funded. Parents must take responsibility for their own children - not the government.

Of course, in right-wing wacko world, it's a heck of a lot better to kick the kids out and make lifelong criminals out of them.
Expecting parents to be responsible for their own children is a historically American way of thinking, not just part of right-wing wacko world.

You see, parents, kids, and young adults need to get back to understanding the principle of personal responsibility. The government was established (partially) to create and enforce laws for the protection of society. It's only since the creation of Socialist and Communist ideologies in the late 1800's and early 1900's that it was even considered that the government should be responsible for the private lives of the citizens. That thought process put forth that the government would, could, and must establish guidelines regarding thought, actions, and outcome for people's private lives. That thought process is antithetical to the principles of basic personal freedom and liberty. With freedom and liberty comes personal responsibility. Personal responsibility includes both receiving the rewards of your own labor and actions, as well as paying the costs for your own mistakes and/or transgressions.

For the government to accomplish what you propose, personal liberty would be naturally required to be surrendered by someone. The tax payer, the kids, the parents, and others.
 

Manc Skipper

Wrinkly member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
35,211
Reaction score
24,052
Location
Southern England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
It's the resonsibility of a society to ensure the education of all it's citizens, and not just a select few. That includes the disadvantaged and difficult ones.
 

clownboy

DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
26,087
Reaction score
10,860
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
It's the resonsibility of a society to ensure the education of all it's citizens, and not just a select few. That includes the disadvantaged and difficult ones.

What? The so-called "disadvantaged and difficult ones" have access to the same education everyone else does. That they CHOOSE to give up because it's too hard or misbehave has nothing whatsoever to do with discrimination.

Now, show us where "society" (whatever you're taking that to mean) has any burden to educate everyone to begin with.
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
32,303
Reaction score
36,347
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I bet he also removed fries from Freedom Fry Fridays!

That bastard!
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It's the resonsibility of a society to ensure the education of all it's citizens, and not just a select few. That includes the disadvantaged and difficult ones.

It's also the responsibility of society to set behavioral standards, such as outlawing murder and other lesser crimes, which invariably requires consequences for transgressions regarding those behavioral standards, including standards of behavior in school for children and consequences when those behavioral standards are not met. It is the responsibility of the parent to educate their child regarding societal standards prior to that child ever attaining the age for entering public school, and the responsibility of the government to enforce those standards - not the other way around.

Just as it is a societal expectation of public schools to provide an education for all children of citizens of the nation and not just a select few, the expectation of society for children to not be violent or disruptive during school is not, in any way, shape, or form, an expectation applied to just a select few, either. All children should be held to the same standards, just as all children should be given access to the same standard of public education.

That's where this argument goes sideways for some, since they seem to feel that certain children should not be held to the same standards of behavior as other children.
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What? The so-called "disadvantaged and difficult ones" have access to the same education everyone else does. That they CHOOSE to give up because it's too hard or misbehave has nothing whatsoever to do with discrimination.

Now, show us where "society" (whatever you're taking that to mean) has any burden to educate everyone to begin with.

I don't think it's a burden, nor do I think it is a responsibility imposed on the people, or power granted to the federal government, by the Constitution, but I do feel it is in our best interest to do so for the common good of our nation.

If we were to discuss where any government participation should reside, then I feel we may find that we could agree more closely, given that I do not feel that the federal government has a place in education, where the states most definitely do. The argument in favor of federal oversight for the sake of creating a national standard can be done by voluntary consensus of states or a public/private board of advisors. For those that think the US Department of Education must exist or all children and all schools will fail, how do they think the US survived prior to Jimmy Carter creating it in 1979?
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I bet he also removed fries from Freedom Fry Fridays!

That bastard!

Correlation does not imply causation, however, in this instance there is corroborative evidence to at least consider the possibility. Not the Freedom Fry Friday part. That was a plot by the French Ambassador and the Minions of Orthodoxy.
 

ocean515

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
36,760
Reaction score
15,464
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
It's the resonsibility of a society to ensure the education of all it's citizens, and not just a select few. That includes the disadvantaged and difficult ones.

It is the responsibility of society to insure a select few don't impair the ability of all it's citizens to receive an education. That responsibility is the burden on all, including the disadvantaged and difficult ones.
 

faithful_servant

DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
12,533
Reaction score
5,659
Location
Beautiful Central Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Seems to me that instead of kicking kids out and making lifelong criminals of them, the schools need to figure out how to keep them busy enough to where the kids don't have time for foolishness...and for that, the schools need to be properly funded.

Of course, in right-wing wacko world, it's a heck of a lot better to kick the kids out and make lifelong criminals out of them.

So you support opening up our forests to logging once more and going back to fund rural schools with a % of the proceeds??? How about cutting off union dues so that we can cut the teacher's pay by the amount of their union dues (no impact on teacher's pay) and apply that savings to the kids?? How about focusing education on things that matter and cutting out the BS and taking the money from the BS and putting it towards those efforts you support??

Or another perspective:
Do you support allowing a few kids to create an environment where none of the other kids can get an education?? How about paying for former military to be trained as campus security to provide a professional method of enforcing the structure needed for all kids to get an education?? How about using a voucher program to allow for privately funded schools that can be established to focus on kids that need the added attention and control and schools that can focus on kids that don't need it??
 
Last edited:

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
So you support opening up our forests to logging once more and going back to fund rural schools with a % of the proceeds??? How about cutting off union dues so that we can cut the teacher's pay by the amount of their union dues (no impact on teacher's pay) and apply that savings to the kids?? How about focusing education on things that matter and cutting out the BS and taking the money from the BS and putting it towards those efforts you support??

Or another perspective:
Do you support allowing a few kids to create an environment where none of the other kids can get an education?? How about paying for former military to be trained as campus security to provide a professional method of enforcing the structure needed for all kids to get an education?? How about using a voucher program to allow for privately funded schools that can be established to focus on kids that need the added attention and control and schools that can focus on kids that don't need it??

There he goes griping about the money again. Here's a clue guy - you get what you pay for...and that goes for educating our kids, too. If you want our kids to be properly educated, then you've got to be willing to pay the higher taxes that such requires. And before you go start griping about how much we're spending on our schools as compared to private schools, bear in mind that private schools don't have a mandate to provide transportation to ALL students within that school's district, and private schools are NOT required to provide education to special-needs kids...like the medically-fragile Foster kids I've had since 1999 - one's sitting a few feet away from me right now. The ones I take care of cost the state taxpayer about a quarter million per year (very little of which goes to me), and that amount does not include the nurse and caregivers and special ed teachers that the school has to pay for during the school day.

Private schools don't do all that...and I wanted to point that out before you kept griping about how much we're paying for our public schools.

NOW, as to your second paragraph, (1) most of the time, "keeping kids busy" isn't just referring to after school, but during school, too - keep the kids busy enough, and they WILL cause less trouble; (2) no, we don't need to turn schools into armed camps - but it sorta sucks that thanks to the guns-for-everybody-all-the-time attitude of the Right, we're the only nation where school lockdowns are a normal fact of life; (3) I have no problem with vouchers...as long as the private schools are properly accredited (some aren't IIRC) and are NOT operated by religions or are otherwise religious in nature. Our tax dollars should never go towards supporting religions.

The most important thing we need is proper funding for schools - but unfortunately, the Right seems to have forgotten that you get what you pay for. If I had my way, kids would stay in school until 5 PM every day, and schools must stop cutting the classes to the bone - bring back music, art, shop, home ec, and all that...because slashing budgets to the bone is what's caused our schools to eliminate those classes.

And one last thing - unless you're a teacher with direct experience at taking care of other peoples' kids all day long, stop griping about teacher pay. It's just like I said above, you get what you pay for...and that's true when it comes to teachers, too. You want to attract better teachers, then you'd better be willing to pay for it.
 

faithful_servant

DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
12,533
Reaction score
5,659
Location
Beautiful Central Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
There he goes griping about the money again. Here's a clue guy - you get what you pay for...and that goes for educating our kids, too. If you want our kids to be properly educated, then you've got to be willing to pay the higher taxes that such requires. And before you go start griping about how much we're spending on our schools as compared to private schools, bear in mind that private schools don't have a mandate to provide transportation to ALL students within that school's district, and private schools are NOT required to provide education to special-needs kids...like the medically-fragile Foster kids I've had since 1999 - one's sitting a few feet away from me right now. The ones I take care of cost the state taxpayer about a quarter million per year (very little of which goes to me), and that amount does not include the nurse and caregivers and special ed teachers that the school has to pay for during the school day.

Private schools don't do all that...and I wanted to point that out before you kept griping about how much we're paying for our public schools.
I can build a private school to the exact same standards as a public school and I pay half as much (I have a friend who's a general contractor and that's the number he gave me). I can run a private school for substantially less cost to the taxpayer with the primary areas of savings being administrative overhead and PERS. I can get better results because I can focus on specific types of kids and tailor my curriculum to those kids.


P.S. - With a voucher system in place, kids like yours would have a SUBSTANTIALLY bigger voucher to use.
P.P.S. - Transportation costs are easy to offset by offering a price cut if you provide carpool for multiple kids. After that, the remaining kids can ride a bus that has seat belts (unlike most school buses).


NOW, as to your second paragraph, (1) most of the time, "keeping kids busy" isn't just referring to after school, but during school, too - keep the kids busy enough, and they WILL cause less trouble; (2) no, we don't need to turn schools into armed camps - but it sorta sucks that thanks to the guns-for-everybody-all-the-time attitude of the Right, we're the only nation where school lockdowns are a normal fact of life; (3) I have no problem with vouchers...as long as the private schools are properly accredited (some aren't IIRC) and are NOT operated by religions or are otherwise religious in nature. Our tax dollars should never go towards supporting religions.

The most important thing we need is proper funding for schools - but unfortunately, the Right seems to have forgotten that you get what you pay for. If I had my way, kids would stay in school until 5 PM every day, and schools must stop cutting the classes to the bone - bring back music, art, shop, home ec, and all that...because slashing budgets to the bone is what's caused our schools to eliminate those classes.

And one last thing - unless you're a teacher with direct experience at taking care of other peoples' kids all day long, stop griping about teacher pay. It's just like I said above, you get what you pay for...and that's true when it comes to teachers, too. You want to attract better teachers, then you'd better be willing to pay for it.

Keeping kids busy isn't the answer, educating them is. Providing a safe environment for them is critical to that. Part of that safe environment means that the kids that are creating an unsafe environment need to be removed from that environment and placed into an environment tailored to their needs (like a private school especially tailored to those kinds of kids could do, with the additional funding needed provided through a higher value "at risk" voucher).

As far pay is concerned, lets pay them what the market will pay, instead of what a union extorts. I'd even support a Fed. program that paid for teacher's education if they agree to work for a time at "lower-end" schools to repay the cost of their education.

I'd love to see longer school days and year-round school for that matter. Also reduce the number of non-school days that happen. I have a co-worker who's kids are off at least one day every two weeks.

Again, tailor programs to the kids using a lot of private schools. Maybe some kids don't give a rat's ass about music and art and want to work with technology. Maybe other kids want a school focused on arts. Maybe some kids want a school that's focused on agriculture. So instead of trying to create a one-size fits all model, give the kids a choice (within reason and with very strict minimum standards and accreditation).

...and don't get me started on common core math. Mu co-worker has shown me his 2nd grader's math homework and that's the stupidest crap I've ever seen.
 

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I can build a private school to the exact same standards as a public school and I pay half as much (I have a friend who's a general contractor and that's the number he gave me). I can run a private school for substantially less cost to the taxpayer with the primary areas of savings being administrative overhead and PERS. I can get better results because I can focus on specific types of kids and tailor my curriculum to those kids.


P.S. - With a voucher system in place, kids like yours would have a SUBSTANTIALLY bigger voucher to use.
P.P.S. - Transportation costs are easy to offset by offering a price cut if you provide carpool for multiple kids. After that, the remaining kids can ride a bus that has seat belts (unlike most school buses).




Keeping kids busy isn't the answer, educating them is. Providing a safe environment for them is critical to that. Part of that safe environment means that the kids that are creating an unsafe environment need to be removed from that environment and placed into an environment tailored to their needs (like a private school especially tailored to those kinds of kids could do, with the additional funding needed provided through a higher value "at risk" voucher).

As far pay is concerned, lets pay them what the market will pay, instead of what a union extorts. I'd even support a Fed. program that paid for teacher's education if they agree to work for a time at "lower-end" schools to repay the cost of their education.

I'd love to see longer school days and year-round school for that matter. Also reduce the number of non-school days that happen. I have a co-worker who's kids are off at least one day every two weeks.

Again, tailor programs to the kids using a lot of private schools. Maybe some kids don't give a rat's ass about music and art and want to work with technology. Maybe other kids want a school focused on arts. Maybe some kids want a school that's focused on agriculture. So instead of trying to create a one-size fits all model, give the kids a choice (within reason and with very strict minimum standards and accreditation).

...and don't get me started on common core math. Mu co-worker has shown me his 2nd grader's math homework and that's the stupidest crap I've ever seen.

You're smoking some really good stuff there, guy. Carpool? Really? Doesn't work so well when parents are working. And then we get the conflicts between kids and between parents...and it becomes an administrative nightmare.

You claim you'll pay what "the market" pays - problem is, when there's no collective bargaining by the teachers, wages go DOWN...and when wages go down, you get crappy teachers...and when you get crappy teachers, you complain that the teachers aren't worth what you're paying them...and it's a race to the bottom.

Again, I've got no problem with vouchers for private schools...as long as those schools have nothing to do with religion.

I'd love to see year-round school, every year. But that will be expensive - better be willing to pay even more. And you know what? MOST parents would gladly pay a bit more to not have to worry about their kids being at home by themselves while the parents are at work.
 

faithful_servant

DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
12,533
Reaction score
5,659
Location
Beautiful Central Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
You're smoking some really good stuff there, guy. Carpool? Really? Doesn't work so well when parents are working. And then we get the conflicts between kids and between parents...and it becomes an administrative nightmare.
It works at the 4 private schools in the town I live in.

You claim you'll pay what "the market" pays - problem is, when there's no collective bargaining by the teachers, wages go DOWN...and when wages go down, you get crappy teachers...and when you get crappy teachers, you complain that the teachers aren't worth what you're paying them...and it's a race to the bottom.
When you have private schools, they seek out good teachers to draw students and the way you get good teachers is by paying them more. That's how the market works.

Again, I've got no problem with vouchers for private schools...as long as those schools have nothing to do with religion.
Why not??

I'd love to see year-round school, every year. But that will be expensive - better be willing to pay even more. And you know what? MOST parents would gladly pay a bit more to not have to worry about their kids being at home by themselves while the parents are at work.
It's good to see that we can agree on something...

Did you notice everything you posted was problems and everything I've posted have been solutions??
 

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
50,493
Reaction score
34,820
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
President Barack Obama’s pressure on public schools to limit the number of suspensions and expulsions for minorities has resulted in a sharp increase in violence for a school district in Wisconsin.

What about all the other school districts in the United States of America?
 

braindrain

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
10,843
Reaction score
3,106
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
There he goes griping about the money again. Here's a clue guy - you get what you pay for...and that goes for educating our kids, too. If you want our kids to be properly educated, then you've got to be willing to pay the higher taxes that such requires. And before you go start griping about how much we're spending on our schools as compared to private schools, bear in mind that private schools don't have a mandate to provide transportation to ALL students within that school's district, and private schools are NOT required to provide education to special-needs kids...like the medically-fragile Foster kids I've had since 1999 - one's sitting a few feet away from me right now. The ones I take care of cost the state taxpayer about a quarter million per year (very little of which goes to me), and that amount does not include the nurse and caregivers and special ed teachers that the school has to pay for during the school day.

Private schools don't do all that...and I wanted to point that out before you kept griping about how much we're paying for our public schools.

NOW, as to your second paragraph, (1) most of the time, "keeping kids busy" isn't just referring to after school, but during school, too - keep the kids busy enough, and they WILL cause less trouble; (2) no, we don't need to turn schools into armed camps - but it sorta sucks that thanks to the guns-for-everybody-all-the-time attitude of the Right, we're the only nation where school lockdowns are a normal fact of life; (3) I have no problem with vouchers...as long as the private schools are properly accredited (some aren't IIRC) and are NOT operated by religions or are otherwise religious in nature. Our tax dollars should never go towards supporting religions.

The most important thing we need is proper funding for schools - but unfortunately, the Right seems to have forgotten that you get what you pay for. If I had my way, kids would stay in school until 5 PM every day, and schools must stop cutting the classes to the bone - bring back music, art, shop, home ec, and all that...because slashing budgets to the bone is what's caused our schools to eliminate those classes.

And one last thing - unless you're a teacher with direct experience at taking care of other peoples' kids all day long, stop griping about teacher pay. It's just like I said above, you get what you pay for...and that's true when it comes to teachers, too. You want to attract better teachers, then you'd better be willing to pay for it.

You do realize that we are in the top five countries that spend the most money per student on education right. But also no where near the top 5 when it comes to results. So tell me again why the only answer is alway more money.
 

coyotedelmar

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2014
Messages
822
Reaction score
183
Location
Arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I bet he also removed fries from Freedom Fry Fridays!

That bastard!


Nah, that's Michelle's job. In fact, that's probably why they fight so much! She encouraged healthy eating and exercise, so now these kids have the energy to fight and fight some more. If only She'd support junk food and soda, the kids would be too tired to ever fight!
 

reinoe

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
16,824
Reaction score
7,183
Location
Out West
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Seems to me that instead of kicking kids out and making lifelong criminals of them, the schools need to figure out how to keep them busy enough to where the kids don't have time for foolishness...and for that, the schools need to be properly funded.

Of course, in right-wing wacko world, it's a heck of a lot better to kick the kids out and make lifelong criminals out of them.
Another progressive ignoring the personal responsibility of the parents. Look if you want the state to control every aspect of a student's life then just stop beating around the bush and say you want all minorities to go straight to prison once they're old enough to attend school.
 

chuckiechan

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Messages
16,568
Reaction score
7,252
Location
California Caliphate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
They need onsite detention taught by uniformed black police officrrs, among other instructors, and the offending students should be fitted with GPS ankle bracelets if they still don't get it.

Next stop is juvenile hall.

You are going to have to go Old Testament on these miscreants early if you hope to turn them around.
 

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
You do realize that we are in the top five countries that spend the most money per student on education right. But also no where near the top 5 when it comes to results. So tell me again why the only answer is alway more money.

Concerning that "most money per student", look AGAIN at what I wrote. Included in that "most money per student" are amounts that most other countries DON'T spend - like providing transportation for all students - even disabled students - within their districts, and providing educational needs for special-needs kids. What's more, most nations out there do NOT provide school lunches, much less have a cafeteria where kids whose parents don't have a lot of money get a free hot meal.

Next time, try comparing apples to apples - because most of the world's schools do NOT do what our schools do.
 
Top Bottom