The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

[dxmnkd316]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

There are three basic factors to a kid's education:
- the kid (how motivated and bright s/he is)
- the parent(s): supportive and involved in the kid's life or not?
- the school: safe environment with good teachers or dangerous with teachers who don't give a ****?

The biggest problems exist in the first two categories. If you have unmotivated kids with parents who don't give a **** about them, they become disruptive to other kids' learning (by not paying attention in class and having behavioral problems). I generally believe that most schools are at least reasonably safe. I also believe that motivated students with parental support can and will overcome even mediocre teachers/texts/schools. The worst combination in a 2 out of 3 being bad scenario is an unmotivated kid with no parental support; even good teachers are unlikely to make a difference. Sadly, "Stand and Deliver" is an exception, not a rule.

That's the problem. LAZINESS! So many people expect to be given handouts while other reach for the brass ring. That's where the divide exists.

 

[leswp1]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

My $0.02 on the issue.

Two generations ago my family would have been considered lower middle class, borderline lower class. We weren't a family of means by any means (on either side of my family tree). My mom was one of five children and her father was a butcher and a minister. My dad had three siblings and his father was a factory worker. Neither of my grandmothers worked (as far as I know). My great-grandparents on my dad's side were first generation Americans or came over on a boat from Norway.

Now? My brother is heading off to med school. I'm a chemical engineer, put 20% down on a 5-bed house a month after I turned 26, I'm free of debt (outside of the mortgage), and I have a sizable retirement. This isn't meant as bragging so much as it is an example that within two generations my family has jumped from the absolute bottom of the middle class to the top of it and my brother is possibly on his way to even greater things. All because there were a few generations of dedicated parents, a good work ethic, and the will to succeed. Anyone can make the jump. They just have to WANT to make the jump.

To simply dream of moving up isn't enough. You have to WANT it. You have to strive for success every day. You can't take a day off.

Agree with this. Our family has a similar story. I think part of wanting things is exposure to be able to know to want. If the family culture doesn't support excelling it is an uphill battle. I also think it helps to have people in your life who have knowledge of how to navigate the college world.

My parents' parents never went to college but were exposed to people who were highly educated. My paternal grandfather worked with a lot of educated men. My Mum's mum was a governess to very wealthy families. Both my parents went to college. There was a difference in expectation tho. My Mum's side it wasn't a choice, it was what you did. My Dad's side it was amazing he could go. Dad's sisters weren't expected to go and no one really thought of it. My bro and I have 2 degrees. I didn't know you didn't have to go to college until I was in high school. My boy cousin got a degree but it was a surprise. His sister was not encouraged or expected to go. Her boys didn't make it thru college. There was no encouragement or expectation that they should succeed. Only her daughter went to college and got no support from her family. The culture in that family is to depress any thoughts of working to succeed via education. It isn't as good as working with your hands. You are stupid and uppity if you have a degree. That is more of a deterrent than anything else including money, experience etc. The girl just sat for the bar and it is amazing how unimpressed her family is about that. She never would have made it without others in the family helping her work it out.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Agree with this. Our family has a similar story. I think part of wanting things is exposure to be able to know to want. If the family culture doesn't support excelling it is an uphill battle. I also think it helps to have people in your life who have knowledge of how to navigate the college world.

My parents' parents never went to college but were exposed to people who were highly educated. My paternal grandfather worked with a lot of educated men. My Mum's mum was a governess to very wealthy families. Both my parents went to college. There was a difference in expectation tho. My Mum's side it wasn't a choice, it was what you did. My Dad's side it was amazing he could go. Dad's sisters weren't expected to go and no one really thought of it. My bro and I have 2 degrees. I didn't know you didn't have to go to college until I was in high school. My boy cousin got a degree but it was a surprise. His sister was not encouraged or expected to go. Her boys didn't make it thru college. There was no encouragement or expectation that they should succeed. Only her daughter went to college and got no support from her family. The culture in that family is to depress any thoughts of working to succeed via education. It isn't as good as working with your hands. You are stupid and uppity if you have a degree. That is more of a deterrent than anything else including money, experience etc. The girl just sat for the bar and it is amazing how unimpressed her family is about that. She never would have made it without others in the family helping her work it out.

I was the first to graduate from college in my family. But both of my parents knew right away that it was their goal as parents to send their children to college. I remember being groomed from a young age to be an engineer (literally before 1st grade). I was reading on my own around 3.5-4 years old. It wasn't difficult stuff. Mainly Boxcar Children. I can trace ALL of this back to when my dad read to us before we went to bed. But he made sure we would be able to read the pages while he was reading. That way we were able to pick up reading very early. Reading led to being able to do math. That led to being able to understand science. Both of those led to engineering.

 

[Tundra]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

I was the first to graduate from college in my family. But both of my parents knew right away that it was their goal as parents to send their children to college.

Great support and encouragement from your family. Not sure which stat is correct, but you would think free college education would mean higher enrollment AND graduation rate (especially with 97% High school graduation level and (2nd) highest score in the world) (Finland).

And not sure if it's the culture (family support, encouragement etc..) or higher k-12 education or free higher education or all 3 that makes a difference in Finland vs Norway (also has "free" college ed).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11203790

The UK is slipping behind its international rivals in the number of graduates, according to a report.

Between 2000 and 2008, it fell from third highest to fifteenth among top industrialised nations for the proportion of young people graduating.

Finland has the highest graduation rate among young people - 46% of men and 80% women - compared with 30% of men and 40% of women in the UK, with these latest OECD figures drawn from 2008.

MOST GRADUATES

* 1 - Finland (63%)
* 2 - Iceland (57%)
* 2 - Slovakia (57%)
* 4 - Poland (50%)
* 5 - New Zealand (48%)
* 6 - Denmark (47%)
* 7 - Ireland (46%)
* 8 - Portugal (45%)
* 9 - Netherlands (41%)
* 9 - Norway (41%)
* 11 - Sweden (40%)
* 12 - Japan (39%)
* 13 - United States (37%)
* 13 - Czech Republic (36%)
* 15 - United Kingdom (35%)

 

[Priceless]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

I must say that the disconnect here is amazing! Here we are being lectured that a quality education is necessary to get ahead in the world while the candidates for the GOP nomination tell us anyone with a college degree (especially from those bastions of liberalism in the Ivy League) are elitist snobs, that teachers who have the audacity to make $50,000/year AND get health benefits are wealthy (yet a hedge fund manager who clears $1B is a poor, burdened man), that all the scientific data behind climate change is an elaborate hoax and that Evolution is "just a theory." Gee, I can't imagine why kids get the idea that education doesn't matter.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

The opposition to evolution is based squarely in their religious background. Climate change opposition is likely due to something else entirely - I wouldn't call it ignorance. My guess is it's a purely political calculation based on the logic that "if I accept human-induced climate change, then I must also accept a widening government role in addressing it". That latter part runs contrary to their political philosophy, so they must reflexively dismiss and oppose the science, no matter how sound it is.

 

[duper]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

To b*tch about lack of freedom and opportunity here of all places is just laughable given how things are in basically the entire developing world (which constitutes the vast majority of the population on earth at this point).

So should we not try to improve things here?

 

[Bakunin]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

So should we not try to improve things here?

How much have the people b*tching about things actually tried to improve them?

I see ample b*tching here from the likes of scooby et al. What exactly have they been doing to improve their perceived ills? Have they contacted their congressional rep? Senator? State rep/senator? Local school district? PTA? Anything? Or are they just sitting on this fringe message board and whining about problems they will never actually attempt to solve?

If you truly think the situation is that bad, do something about it that goes beyond posting endlessly about it to a bunch of anonymous strangers on the interwebs. After all, talk is cheap.

 

[duper]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Fair enough

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

There are three basic factors to a kid's education:
- the kid (how motivated and bright s/he is)
- the parent(s): supportive and involved in the kid's life or not?
- the school: safe environment with good teachers or dangerous with teachers who don't give a ****?

I grew up in an environment without number 2 or number 3. I imagine many kids still do. Number 1 is made inherently more difficult without 2 and 3. It's now too much for me to ask for the same tax rate as a hedge fund manager.

 

[unofan]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

As clearly shown in Wisconsin, eliminating collective bargaining in the education sector has allowed for massive savings.

How has a law that's meant to drive savings through attrtition but has only been in place for what - 4 months? - show anything? Is this like ObamaCare creating the massive federal deficit even though most of its provisions haven't even taken effect, yet?

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

How much have the people b*tching about things actually tried to improve them?

I see ample b*tching here from the likes of scooby et al. What exactly have they been doing to improve their perceived ills? Have they contacted their congressional rep? Senator? State rep/senator? Local school district? PTA? Anything? Or are they just sitting on this fringe message board and whining about problems they will never actually attempt to solve?

If you truly think the situation is that bad, do something about it that goes beyond posting endlessly about it to a bunch of anonymous strangers on the interwebs. After all, talk is cheap.

You're assuming that talking about things and acting on things are disjoint sets. For example, just because Scooby likes to post his ironic, anarchistic love for Bachmann here doesn't mean he isn't going door-to-door ironically, anarchistically supporting her in real life. His performance art in one area does not preclude his performance art in another.

 

[unofan]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

OK, but UNOFAN said most real economists (giving Friedman as an example) would say flat tax proponents grossly underestimate what the true rate would be. So the question still is, what rate did Friedman say a flat tax would need to be?

I gave Friedman as an example of a real economist that wasn't a Keynsian (in answer to your follow-up question). Frankly, I don't know what his flat tax rate was or would be today if he were still with us. In any case, his best work always dealt with the monetary side of things (ie, the Fed), not the fiscal stuff (the government).

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

The latest year for which figures are available as this is written is the taxable year 1959 in U.S. Internal Revenue Service, Statistics of Income for 1959… A flat rate of 23½ percent on the aggregate taxable income would have yielded (.235) X $166,540 million = $39,137 million…The final yield would have been about the same as that actually attained.

– Milton Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom (1962)

 

[Bakunin]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

You're assuming that talking about things and acting on things are disjoint sets. For example, just because Scooby likes to post his ironic, anarchistic love for Bachmann here doesn't mean he isn't going door-to-door ironically, anarchistically supporting her in real life. His performance art in one area does not preclude his performance art in another.

Given Americans' penchant for endlessly complaining about things, I figure my assumption is a reasonably safe one.

Most people simply don't have the time or motivation to effect change via protests or any other means. They're too tired from working all day and arguing with but not having relations with the spouse all night.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Given Americans' penchant for endlessly complaining about things, I figure my assumption is a reasonably safe one.

Most people simply don't have the time or motivation to effect change via protests or any other means.

Which is why voting matters. Or could matter, if the guys with the real ideas weren't weeded out early as "unelectable."

Certainly it's great if you can effect change directly, but we all learned in 2000 that it really does make a dime's worth of difference even if you're just pulling the lever.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Which is why voting matters.

For presidential elections, voting only matters in a handful of states. The rest aren't competitive enough for an individual to come remotely close to mattering. Even at the Congressional district level, most of us don't matter thanks to gerrymandering.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

For presidential elections, voting only matters in a handful of states. The rest aren't competitive enough for an individual to come remotely close to mattering. Even at the Congressional district level, most of us don't matter thanks to gerrymandering.

Few states are so uncompetitive that a candidate polls 50%+ of all eligible voters. It's probably true that even if every liberal in Utah or every conservative in DC went to the polls it still wouldn't matter. But otherwise, we actually do have the power in our hands.

Americans are afflicted with political affluenza, where having the power to directly elect our representatives breeds complacency and actually makes the status quo more secure than if it were enforced by coercive means. But that comes down to education and motivation -- things that are within our power.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

The opposition to evolution is based squarely in their religious background. Climate change opposition is likely due to something else entirely - I wouldn't call it ignorance. My guess is it's a purely political calculation based on the logic that "if I accept human-induced climate change, then I must also accept a widening government role in addressing it". That latter part runs contrary to their political philosophy, so they must reflexively dismiss and oppose the science, no matter how sound it is.

Yet the messages also reinforce themselves. The story that's loud and clear is that science is fallible and should be viewed with doubt...and trust only what is culturally 'closer to home' as the media doesn't tell the truth.

Indeed, the country faces a serious risk of sliding backwards in science and fact based decision making while the rest of the world races forwards. Motivations are simple...many who are not strong in science or fact based decision are quick to doubt their value anyways and its easier for them as messengers to gain power by attacking others points of view by dissecting the methodology of fact.

Enter candidates like Perry.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

The opposition to evolution is based squarely in their religious background. Climate change opposition is likely due to something else entirely - I wouldn't call it ignorance. My guess is it's a purely political calculation based on the logic that "if I accept human-induced climate change, then I must also accept a widening government role in addressing it". That latter part runs contrary to their political philosophy, so they must reflexively dismiss and oppose the science, no matter how sound it is.

This works in reverse, as well, of course. The reflexive, out-of-hand dismissal of proposals for things like school choice seems to me to be people with a preconceived "trustability matrix" having to immediately oppose anything that comes from a "tainted" source.

In the case of the evolution / stem cell / climate change / gravity deniers, it's just taken to a reductio ad absurdum where the "tainted" source being rejected is science. Who are them thar pointy heads to tell me what to think! And there's a strong admixture of a mindset that accepts "truth from authority," where the authority is God, pastor, football coach, daddy, talk radio host. The authoritarian strain is creepily and ironically strong among people who wave the banner of individualism. "Freedom is slavery."