Badnarik on schools

[AFB]

Badnarik : American schools were number 1 in Math/Science in '63. After 50 years of government control, they are nowhere near there.
http://www.etopiamedia.net/empnn/audio/badnarik1.wma


And they weren't under government control before that?

 

[Piano Man]

The funny thing is that it was right around that time that Math and Science was starting to be stressed more than ever because of the tech race with the Soviets. And look were it has gotten us. You need a full curriculum with English, Reading, History, Geography, Music, Art, Writing, P.E., Industrial Arts, Home Ec, and Math and Science. Statistics show that students who take an eclectic curriculum end up scoring better.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Piano Man
The funny thing is that it was right around that time that Math and Science was starting to be stressed more than ever because of the tech race with the Soviets. And look were it has gotten us. You need a full curriculum with English, Reading, History, Geography, Music, Art, Writing, P.E., Industrial Arts, Home Ec, and Math and Science. Statistics show that students who take an eclectic curriculum end up scoring better.

Indeed, all knowledge is intertwined.

 

[beer]

Isn't it ironic that everyone bitches about american schools but we still have the best universities in the world?

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: beer
Isn't it ironic that everyone bitches about american schools but we still have the best universities in the world?

"To take the measure of oneself by reference to one's colleagues leads to envy or complacency rather than constructive self-examination."
- Benno C. Schmidt, Jr.

"These are days when no one should rely unduly on his "competence." Strength lies in improvisation. All the decisive blows are struck left-handed."
- Walter Benjamin

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: beer
Isn't it ironic that everyone bitches about american schools but we still have the best universities in the world?

Not really....

Also, our universities are a reflection of money put into them and not necessarily the quality of students (if you're suggeting that our universities are good because their students are good). Also, universities and schools have very different missions. They're apples and oranges so it's reasonable that we would have the best universities and crappy schools.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: amdfanboy
Badnarik : American schools were number 1 in Math/Science in '63. After 50 years of government control, they are nowhere near there.
http://www.etopiamedia.net/empnn/audio/badnarik1.wma


And they weren't under government control before that?

You misunderstood. Federal government control. In '63, all public schools in the US were under various local and state government controls, with no federal control or funding. Federal control has been a disaster in our schools.

 

[Infohawk]

What federal control is there? And aren't libertarians against any kind of government intervention?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
What federal control is there? And aren't libertarians against any kind of government intervention?

What federal control isn't there now? With the enactment of No Child Left Behind, federal control of public schools is pretty much complete <edit> with disasterous effects, while the school voucher initiative is a backdoor to take control of private schools.</edit>
And no, Libertarians believe that localities may have whatever kind of local government control of public schooling they see reasonably fit. It is federal control that is unconstitutional.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Infohawk
What federal control is there? And aren't libertarians against any kind of government intervention?

What federal control isn't there now? With the enactment of No Child Left Behind, federal control of public schools is pretty much complete.
And no, Libertarians believe that localities may have whatever kind of local government control of public schooling they see reasonably fit. It is federal control that is unconstitutional.

No child left behind is pretty recent. Come on. Blaming school failure on no child left behind is bogus since they were failed well before that. I still don't see how the federal government can be blamed for our schools' failures, especially since they are by and large controlled by the state from what I understand.

Also, do Libertarians really believe in local government control? So a city could tax at 90% and that would be cool?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Infohawk
What federal control is there? And aren't libertarians against any kind of government intervention?

What federal control isn't there now? With the enactment of No Child Left Behind, federal control of public schools is pretty much complete.
And no, Libertarians believe that localities may have whatever kind of local government control of public schooling they see reasonably fit. It is federal control that is unconstitutional.

No child left behind is pretty recent. Come on. Blaming school failure on no child left behind is bogus since they were failed well before that. I still don't see how the federal government can be blamed for our schools' failures, especially since they are by and large controlled by the state from what I understand.

Also, do Libertarians really believe in local government control? So a city could tax at 90% and that would be cool?

Do NOT lie and twist my words. The flames will come down. I did NOT blame school failure on No Child Left Behind. I said that it completed the scheme of federal control of public schools nationwide, i.e. the straw that broke the camel's back.
How federal government control has damaged our public schools can only be speculated, although the endless mandates and corruptions are the likely culprits. The reality though is simply that federal control has damaged our public schools, unquestionably. The more the feds are involved, the worse it gets. Feel free to investigate this topic on your own.

The 10th Amendment to the Constitution reserves those powers not delegated to the federal government by the constitution to the states and people respectively. If the people of a locality democratically choose to tax themselves 90% to fund their schools, then that would be their right. Citizens of that locality who disapproved would be free to move to a different locality which does not tax themselves to that extent, which is the exactly why the Constitution was written the way it was.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: amdfanboy
Badnarik : American schools were number 1 in Math/Science in '63. After 50 years of government control, they are nowhere near there.
http://www.etopiamedia.net/empnn/audio/badnarik1.wma


And they weren't under government control before that?

You misunderstood. Federal government control. In '63, all public schools in the US were under various local and state government controls, with no federal control or funding. Federal control has been a disaster in our schools.

Origins of Federal Control over Education

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Infohawk
What federal control is there? And aren't libertarians against any kind of government intervention?

What federal control isn't there now? With the enactment of No Child Left Behind, federal control of public schools is pretty much complete.
And no, Libertarians believe that localities may have whatever kind of local government control of public schooling they see reasonably fit. It is federal control that is unconstitutional.

No child left behind is pretty recent. Come on. Blaming school failure on no child left behind is bogus since they were failed well before that. I still don't see how the federal government can be blamed for our schools' failures, especially since they are by and large controlled by the state from what I understand.

Also, do Libertarians really believe in local government control? So a city could tax at 90% and that would be cool?

Do NOT lie and twist my words. The flames will come down. I did NOT blame school failure on No Child Left Behind. I said that it completed the scheme of federal control of public schools nationwide, i.e. the straw that broke the camel's back.

How federal government control has damaged our public schools can only be speculated, although the endless mandates and corruptions are the likely culprits. The reality though is simply that federal control has damaged our public schools, unquestionably. The more the feds are involved, the worse it gets. Feel free to investigate this topic on your own.

Please. I'm not doing your research. Look at your bolds. You don't really know why the federal government broke the camel's back, so why are you blaming them? If you can't explain it, I don't buy it. I'm willing to be persuaded but you haven't offered any evidence except vagueries.

The 10th Amendment to the Constitution reserves those powers not delegated to the federal government by the constitution to the states and people respectively. If the people of a locality democratically choose to tax themselves 90% to fund their schools, then that would be their right. Citizens of that locality who disapproved would be free to move to a different locality which does not tax themselves to that extent, which is the exactly why the Constitution was written the way it was.

I'm asking what libertarians believe it SHOULD say. I always thought they believed ALL government should be limited. Guess not... (though I suspect you're making a strict constructionist argumetn more than a libertarian argument).

 

[AFB]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: amdfanboy
Badnarik : American schools were number 1 in Math/Science in '63. After 50 years of government control, they are nowhere near there.
http://www.etopiamedia.net/empnn/audio/badnarik1.wma


And they weren't under government control before that?

You misunderstood. Federal government control. In '63, all public schools in the US were under various local and state government controls, with no federal control or funding. Federal control has been a disaster in our schools.

Origins of Federal Control over Education

I wouldn't say it's the federal government's fault. It is more the fault of the local school district and the parents. You have parents that care less if their kid murders someone or much less doesn't do their homework. Then you have the stupid assemblies that ruin the whole day once every two weeks. Their are good schools, but its different depending on where you live.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Please. I'm not doing your research. Look at your bolds. You don't really know why the federal government broke the camel's back, so why are you blaming them? If you can't explain it, I don't buy it. I'm willing to be persuaded but you haven't offered any evidence except vagueries.

No, I'm not doing your research. I know that I am right. If you disagree with what I say and wish to prove me wrong, it is up to you to do the work and provide the proofs, not the other way around. If you don't believe me and are too lazy to prove me wrong, I simply could not give a sh!t. Either way, you are not entitled.

I'm asking what libertarians believe it SHOULD say. I always thought they believed ALL government should be limited. Guess not... (though I suspect you're making a strict constructionist argumetn more than a libertarian argument).

And I told you. What you may believe about reality does not make it real. The 10th Amendment is clear and no where in the Constitution does it say that an individual locality could not tax themselves to such an extent provided they came to the decision democratically. Rest assured though, that any Libertarians in that locality would vote No on the taxation initiative though. Does that please you?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Vic
No, I'm not doing your research. I know that I am right. If you disagree with what I say and wish to prove me wrong, it is up to you to do the work and provide the proofs, not the other way around. If you don't believe me and are too lazy to prove me wrong, I simply could not give a sh!t. Either way, you are not entitled.

You made the statement, not me. Therefore, you have to defend your statement. Otherwise it's baseless and useless. I don't necessarily disagree with your statement. Except I actually demand reasons for what I believe in. And having reasons means you can provide them. And it's fine if you don't give a "sh!t", angry man, but that's not going to stop me from calling you on unsubstantiated claims.

And I told you. What you may believe about reality does not make it real. The 10th Amendment is clear and no where in the Constitution does it say that an individual locality could not tax themselves to such an extent provided they came to the decision democratically. Rest assured though, that any Libertarians in that locality would vote No on the taxation initiative though. Does that please you?

You still don't seem to fathom that I'm asking you about what the libertarian position is, not the constitutional reality (or what you think is reality) is. I mistakenly thought you were a libertarian. Sorry.

 

[Vic]

I only get angry at the moronic and the purposely obtuse. Don't worry though, I get over it quickly.


edit: btw, the Libertarian position IS the Constitution. For those who would break the highest law of our land as easy as breathing, I understand that such a concept can be difficult to understand.

 

[daveshel]

All this education and knowledge out there and half the prople don't even know how to correctly use an apostrophe.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: daveshel
All this education and knowledge out there and half the prople don't even know how to correctly use an apostrophe.

I'm not clear on what you're suggesting. Are you saying the person who makes a claim should do the research, or the person questioning it should, or both? I think it's standard procedure that the person making a statement has to support it. Otherwise, it's just an unsubstantiated claim.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Vic
I only get angry at the moronic and the purposely obtuse. Don't worry though, I get over it quickly.

I'm not the one who can't back up my statements.

edit: btw, the Libertarian position IS the Constitution. For those who would break the highest law of our land as easy as breathing, I understand that such a concept can be difficult to understand.

:roll:

And no, the Libertarian position (assuming what you said it is) is not the Constitution. At least not the highest court in the land's interpretation. Please look into the words normative and positive.

 

[Vic]

You're confused. Let me help you. If I had any respect for you, I might consider bothering. But I don't and I have better things to do with my time. In the meantime, you've taken this thread seriously off-topic trying to have me provide you with some fanciful web document that you could easily google yourself to defend a position that is widely regarded as a matter of fact, not conjecture. In 1963, US public schools were the best in the world. Today, they are no where near that, with the greatest single factor being increasing federal government control during that time. Do you refute this?

That same court made George W. Bush the President of the US despite lacking the Constitutional authority to do so. Are you going to go on and tell me you agree with their every decision, or that you agree completely with their interpretation of the Constitution? Let's keep this real, eh?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Vic
You're confused. Let me help you. If I had any respect for you, I might consider bothering. But I don't and I have better things to do with my time.

You're furious. LOL.

In the meantime, you've taken this thread seriously off-topic

No I haven't. I'm asking how Badnarik or anyone else can blame the federal government. That's on topic.

trying to have me provide you with some fanciful web document that you could easily google yourself to defend a position that is widely regarded as a matter of fact, not conjecture.

Again, provide supports for your arguments. Don't expect other people to buy whatever BS you throw out.

In 1963, US public schools were the best in the world. Today, they are no where near that

For the sake of argument, yes. I never challenged those statements.

, with the greatest single factor being increasing federal government control during that time.

This is what you haven't shown to be the case. THIS IS THE ISSUE. Please support your statement.

Are you going to go on and tell me you agree with their every decision, or that you agree completely with their interpretation of the Constitution?

Of course not. But I don't claim one party's view is the constitutional truth or present it as such.

Let's keep this real, eh?

It's hard when you're so angry and have trouble focusing on the issue in question.

 

[Vic]

*yawns*

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: daveshel
All this education and knowledge out there and half the prople don't even know how to correctly use an apostrophe.

I'm not clear on what you're suggesting. Are you saying the person who makes a claim should do the research, or the person questioning it should, or both? I think it's standard procedure that the person making a statement has to support it. Otherwise, it's just an unsubstantiated claim.

Not me. I'm just of on a generalized rant about the apostrophe. I think you use them corectly.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Vic
*yawns*

There is a word for making claims without giving reasons: bleating.