Ban government schools!

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ShotGunRum
 


This so called capitalist system you speak of is nothing more than a system of fiat money run by the state... Where the state has the power to make laws at its choosing and has no moral boundaries... I'm not sure where you learned economics but the state and fiat money have no place in an economy!




posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShotGunRum
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 




do you really think most of these kids are getting an education?


yup


I would recommend you do some research.


Originally posted by ShotGunRum
The US has a 99% literacy rate because of public schools. Adults that cannot read in this country usually have learning problems, like dyslexia.


Not accurate.
actual statistics, which you didn't offer
some good information on dyslexia measuring here


Originally posted by ShotGunRum


They spy on kids with school-issued computers, teachers fight with kids, school bus drivers and aids attack kids, kids attack each other, we have shootings.....what, exactly, is there worth preserving?


And this is 1% of the whole school population or less.


No, that's all over the place. Again, where are these stats you keep claiming?


Originally posted by ShotGunRum


I have also seen some really BAD teachers, and they keep on teaching as well.


This is present at basically any job. You forgot to mention the really good ones, the good ones, the ok ones as well.


No, I most certainly did NOT forget. You simply left out the part immediately before what you quoted from my post:


Now I KNOW some fine teachers. I have family and friends that teach. I have also seen some really BAD teachers, and they keep on teaching as well.


Really, you can do better than to make unsubstantiated claims.


Originally posted by ShotGunRum


Even teachers that molest have been known to be moved, NOT reported, NOT fired, and NOT prevented from teaching elsewhere.


That's actually illegal so......anyone doing this would be arrested and fired. I'm sure it's happened once or twice ...
edit on 15-12-2012 by ShotGunRum because: (no reason given)


Illegal or not, it's happened. It's illegal when the RCC does it, and it's illegal when the school systems do it. Lots of things that are illegal happen all the time. Don't confuse "illegal" with "impossible".



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


The literacy rate in the USA is 99%


definition: age 15 and over can read and write
total population: 99%
male: 99%
female: 99% (2003 est.)


www.cia.gov...



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 01:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShotGunRum
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


The literacy rate in the USA is 99%


definition: age 15 and over can read and write
total population: 99%
male: 99%
female: 99% (2003 est.)


www.cia.gov...


Interesting.....however, that disagrees with a lot of other figures. Someone isn't being honest...

this one says 14% can't read

this one talks about how many read well below level

One side or the other is lying about this. That' or they are all wrong, and don't have a clue how to get real data. I know this much; when shopping for school books for this year, I saw a lot more for reading than anything else. Reading, mind you, for grades about 1-2. Clearly, the people publishing the books see a need for reading help for older kids.

In any case, we have conflicting data. The question now is; where in all that data is the truth? I don't buy 99%, just based on what I have seen personally. What we really need is the raw data they use for these studies. We could have two bad sets, really. One, an "official" number, set at 99%, to make it seem as though the United States is doing well, in the eyes of the world. The other, set lower (maybe at 86%, based on that one link) by people wanting to push some program or product.

All of that aside......take a look at the average post of the average teen online, and how poorly they write. Bad usage, worse spelling, terrible sentence construction; it goes on and on. If they can't write any better than what we see online, how well do you think they can read?



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by ShotGunRum
 


Your acting like the only way people can learn to read is from government...

"The only people who can teach us is the government." That's what I'm getting from you.

This is a misconception and a dangerous one at that... Real learning does not happen inside government facilities, ill tell you that for sure...



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 05:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by smyleegrl
reply to post by crankySamurai
 


I teach elementary, we don't do much with economics.

But no. My husband teaches middle and high school...and he requires his students to challenge preconceived notions and take a stand, one way or another. I'll talk to him and get some more specific examples if you are interested.


Imagine the argument “Grocery stores must be government run because corporations would only be concerned for their profit. People need food, that should not be profitable.”

All who support Government controlled education, (problem #1) why do you find that largely eliminating choice in education is a good idea? One size fits all? What about special interests, religious beliefs, alternate learning techniques, etc? Monopolies are never a good idea and will eventually be abused by those in power.

But even more importantly, (problem #2) the government will not teach the kids that it is bad, that it kills people for political gain, etc. Despite encouraging critical thinking, the acceptable conclusion is always, the US government is overall a good institution, protecting freedom and providing a comfortable standard of living. In reality the government consists of people who have the same weaknesses as anybody else, and are just as much concerned about their personal and their family’s welfare before that of strangers as the people in the private sector. So I do not want to give them power over my family's future.

Government controlled education creates a class society (problem #3). Students are not treated by administrators as customers, they are numbers. What counts is attendance. Teachers are “civil servants” and their word will weigh heavier than that of a “regular” person (e.g. in divorce court). Republicans typically want less government, Democrats want the government to take over more responsibilities. Not surprisingly, teachers typically vote Democrat. And of course they usually convey their conviction that since companies are concerned with profit, the government is morally superior, and by extension its employees are morally superior to those in the private sector.

As crankySamurai indicated, you and your husband are good people. You do what you believe is right and you work hard. But I believe I should have the choice if I want to pay the price for sending my kids to your school or to a different one.

There also needs to be a choice between news media – a real choice. And there should be also a choice between governments. No choice between governments means, citizens are in a big prison (take Syria as an example). Monopolies are inherently bad.



posted on Jan, 1 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   
edit on 1-1-2013 by themoniker because: nevermind



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


Government schools are not about kids learning.
edit on 4-1-2013 by crankySamurai because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by MrUncreated
 


Why do people think that all parents are capable of teaching?


If anything, this is the case FOR kids going to government schools.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by MrUncreated
 


Why do people think that all parents are capable of teaching?


If anything, this is the case FOR kids going to government schools.


They do no need to teach. They do not need to grow their own, nor do they need the government to grow their food for them.

An economy allows for goods and services to be exchanged. You buy food, you buy medicine, you buy education, according to your needs and preferences. But maybe you want to remain your whole life the baby of the government.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


In case you missed the above video I would like to emphasize that the public school system is not about teaching kids to think or learn. It is the OPPOSITE.

No government has ever been interested in a people capable of critical thinking.

What politician wants a citizenry that does not question the information distributed by officials or the actions taken by them. They want followers who blindly listen and only ask the right questions.

This is not a conspiracy but the NATURE of governments.

Children should not spend their days in government facilities, in a authoritarian environment, when they are taught to follow directions. This is NOT prudent.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 02:24 PM
link   
It always amazes me how people assume that, since they went to school, they are suddenly an expert in education.

Let me assure you, the teachers are working hard to teach your child critical thinking skills. In a public school, you have the right to view the curriculum, and you can ask how the teacher plans on teaching those skills to the students. That is your right as a parent and a tax payer.

All teachers have at least a bachelor's degree in education....and many more have masters' or doctorates. Why? Because of the continuing education requirements.;..such as the workshops on better strategies for teaching certain subjects, etc.

The US is lagging behind in education, and most of that is due to several complex factors. The most important? The child's family influence and socio-economic status. If the parents care and will work with the child, that child has a much better chance of succeeding in schools. However, many of the parents in the lower socio-economic strata don't value education, or simply are unable to help their children. And there's a large percentage of these children who had mothers abusing substances while pregnant...so add that into the mix.

Now lets look at the schools. Basically, if the school is situated in a high-income area, serving parents with "professional career" jobs (doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc)...then its a safe bet that is a high performing school. Why? Because those parents do value education, and have the means to help their child succeed.

My sis-in-law teaches at one such school. The parents are loaded, and the typical fundraiser brings in thousands of extra dollars. That school is high performing. Compare that with my school; I teach in what can best be described as country projects. Some of my kids are living in their cars, don't have enough food to eat....its bad. Our last fundraiser we raised $700. Many of the parents at my school are high school drop-outs, unemployed, or employed in illegal activities. Some are in prison. Our two schools are radically different....my school is low-performing. But when you have kids who wonder when if they're going to eat that night, its hard to get them to worry about adding fractions.

Our school system is in trouble, and needs a major overhaul. I do not dispute that. But we aren't "indoctrination centers," teaching children how to salute and goose-walk.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


Again you are missing my point. I am not questioning the hard work or intentions of the teachers, faculty members, principles, education committee ect.

Look at it this way when Hitler took over Austria the very first thing he did was start to get people to trust his regime. There were people starving and poor conditions for they were going through economic troubles. So he started setting up ration centers and issuing food stamps. People saw the immediate benefits of food on the table and they were appeased.

Next people started sending their children to German controlled schools. He has set up a nice environment where the children were safe and the parents were trusting that it was in their childs best interest. This is where Hitler had access to the youth and was able to begin molding them into what he envisioned.

This is the power of schools.

The state should not be teaching its own history. It should not be teaching math, writing, reading. It should not have the ability to form a curriculum, a method of teaching. These are powerful tools that should not be trusted to a government. It is how we end up in a Orwellian scenario, or with a dictator, or with an empire, or with Communism ect. A society of free people does not receive their education from the state.

edit on 4-1-2013 by crankySamurai because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


To answer you response about teaching in country projects, these kids especially should not be wasting their time going to public school. They would be much better off securing food, cloths, shelter ect. But no they are instead wasting their days in a government daycare center. They could be training, working, learning a usable skill or any other of the numerous activities that are more vital to child growing up in a poverty stricken house.

No instead they will spend their days at government facilities until they are 18 and then are dumped out in the world with no tradable skill and a head full of nonsense.

This type of inefficiency is the result of government interference in the free market. If the market found this type of education profitable (which I doubt) it would provide it. But more than simply the argument of efficiency and morality for free market education, state education, as I stated before it downright dangerous to freedom.

Ban government schools.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by crankySamurai
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


To answer you response about teaching in country projects, these kids especially should not be wasting their time going to public school. They would be much better off securing food, cloths, shelter ect. But no they are instead wasting their days in a government daycare center. They could be training, working, learning a usable skill or any other of the numerous activities that are more vital to child growing up in a poverty stricken house.

No instead they will spend their days at government facilities until they are 18 and then are dumped out in the world with no tradable skill and a head full of nonsense.

This type of inefficiency is the result of government interference in the free market. If the market found this type of education profitable (which I doubt) it would provide it. But more than simply the argument of efficiency and morality for free market education, state education, as I stated before it downright dangerous to freedom.

Ban government schools.



Some people learn better by doing so I guess apprenticeship is about as close to a free market education as you can get in this world, at least as far as learning a skill. I don't know all the rules of it though.


How to Become an Apprentice

Steps to become an apprentice

Are you a student in high school planning your future? Are you out of high school and looking for a new direction? Or, do you have a job and are looking for a different career? Discover if the Apprenticeship Advantage is for you.

www.lni.wa.gov...






top topics



 
6
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join