U.S. Politics 2016: "You Suck!!!" "No, you Suck!!!"

[Ice Queen]

3 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

I agree that a four year education isn't for everybody, nor should it be. For many folks, doing a two year technical degree would make sense. For one, there is some advantage in getting started in your trade at an earlier age.

In fact, I'd almost argue, that guaranteeing everyoneone at least two years of technical training, after high school is a no-brainer.

My son will graduate next month from an 18 month technical program in culinary. That's what he's good at. He's now employed at a large grocery chain--union, with benefits and a chef's apprenticeship. When he's done in another 18-24 months, he'll make as much as I do now with no debt. 

My daughter, on the other hand, scorned that approach. When she graduates from her program in 2.5 years (or longer, who knows), she'll be roughly $40K in debt. Of course, her potential ROI and earning potential is a lot higher, but in my opinion my son was the smarter one. He would never have survived four years at a university and he knew that. It just wasn't for him and that's perfectly okay. I think my daughter is going to have a huge case of buyer's remorse when she realizes that she could have knocked out most of her core classes at community college and I could have paid cash for her to do that--cutting her debt load in half. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, mormont said:

And he wasn't done there!

 

He's been President-elect for three weeks and he's already calling for revoking people's citizenship. When will the people who are downplaying the dangers of a Trump presidency going to wake up? 

[Mlle. Zabzie]

10 hours ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

 

Why, may I ask? It seems like the evidence for the effectiveness of pre-k programs is mixed.

https://www.brookings.edu/research/does-pre-k-work-it-depends-how-picky-you-are/

https://www.brookings.edu/research/we-need-more-evidence-in-order-to-create-effective-pre-k-programs/

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/04/opinion/sunday/does-pre-k-make-any-difference.html

That last one notes that programs in NJ and Boston worked better, but were pretty expensive.

 

Two reasons:

1.  The fact that certain programs are better than others suggests that we need to make sure we are doing it effectively.  My own view is that better prepared small children (in terms of socialization, play, etc.) will lead to better prepared kindergarteners, etc.

2.  It's a huge help to working parents.  Less stress on the parents = less stress on the child = better outcomes.

[Datepalm]

There's evidence that ECD education is crucial, not just in preparing kids for pre/school, but possibly even in developing basic cognitive abilities. Defecits that open up before age 5 are much harder, or possibly even impossible, to close than ones that open later.

 

[Rippounet]

10 hours ago, Altherion said:

Extending the range of activities that is subsidized makes the proposal more fair, but it also makes it less feasible: where is the money for all of this going to come from? If you can convince the 1% to share the wealth, then I would agree with you -- but it is much more likely that this will come from the poor and middle class.

That is very possible, alas. Nonetheless, many countries of the world function with a progressive income tax which the 1% doesn't oppose ; also, even assuming the 1% does not participate, a socialised system may still work.
Because cost-efficiency is often overlooked. Both the American health care system and the American higher education system are remarkably inefficient as a whole. For example, it's estimated that a French student costs on average around 11,000 euros a year while an American one costs around 22,000. Counter-intuitively socialized systems can be very cost-effective.

7 hours ago, Altherion said:

Because they have the resources to tweak laws and regulations such that most costs fall on the 99% as well as pass on whatever taxes are applied to them on to consumers (which, again, are mostly the 99%). They have to be seriously afraid before they'll actually share the wealth.

Yes and no. Again, counter-intuitvely, a fair system can be economically beneficial for a country, which many people are aware of. The Buffet rule, after all, comes from one of the richest men in the world. And Hillary did endorse part of this project at least. I'd argue that despite the actual outcome of the election, the US has just come very close to getting far more from the 1% than it has in a long time.

[The guy from the Vale]

1 hour ago, Castel said:

Assuming they don't punch themselves out (or give up, that's also possible)

They have no cachet with Republicans , hopefully the pitter-patter of reports on each Trump issue don't just get considered the new normal by the left and independents.

There are other options. Threat of bankrupcy is one of them. Thiel has already shown how to do it.

[Lany Freelove Cassandra]

17 hours ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

To what level should education be a fundamental right?  That is, I believe that the state does have an interest in having an educated populace, but the question is to what level is that education a "public good" that all should be asked to contribute toward (so, in a sense, a "right")?  I personally don't think asking the general population to pay for people to get vanity degrees is currently in the public interest or would be viewed as such in the United States (though it could become so at some point).  So, I guess I disagree that education beyond what is minimally necessary to be a producing member of the society in question is any kind of "right."    

I think I am in the middle ground.  I don't think people should be able to a free vanity degree or continue in school for as long as they please. 

I also happen to think that trade schools and certifications would make a lot more sense in most cases.

I'd support the first two years of college as completely paid.  Those are generally all the core courses, but I'd have a sliding scale for further education based on the needs of the state.  The state has a science/math teacher shortage, 100% for that field; a nurse shortage? 100%; more personal injury lawyers than they know what to do with: sorry, nope; but other types of law degrees could still qualify for partial or complete payment.

I also happen to think there should be some sort of civil service requirement for anyone who gets the free education and is not working in a field that benefits society (electronics, engineering, programming, ect, and working in the private sector)

 

[Castel]

31 minutes ago, theguyfromtheVale said:

There are other options. Threat of bankrupcy is one of them. Thiel has already shown how to do it.

Like Brett Hart Gawker screwed Gawker though. It's not like Thiel got them for writing negative stuff about him.

[LongRider]

1 hour ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

Absolutely. Not everyone is cut out for a traditional university. Their talents lay in other directions and that is a GOOD thing. 

Yes! 

So, along the lines of a 2 year post-high school technical or trades education, why not extend high school for 2 years and grant associate's degrees? Our school district allows some kids to dual enroll at community college while still in high school and to earn an associates that way. 

This is a great idea.

And can we please bring back OVT, when everyone was required to learn to cook and sew, and take wood shop or electrical. 

OVT?  I haven't heard that term before but in high school I took both 'Home Ec' and shop class.  Cooking in one, welding in the other.  Don't do either now but at least learned about them. 

When a science geek is tone deaf and can't draw a straight line without a ruler, we shrug it off and say that's just not what they're good at. But artsy people are expected to be good at math and science regardless. It makes no sense. 

My generation was the first to go to college in droves. Somewhere along the way, we downplayed the value of the trades. Union Busting!  That's disgusting!  We will always need electricians and plumbers, cooks and hairdressers, masons and bricklayers. Never underestimate the value of those skills. And they are very useful skills. It's not glamorous, but it pays the bills and there is always job security. 

Now I have to disagree with your statement "there is always job security."  There may always be jobs in the trades but that does not mean they are secure jobs for the workers.  Without good laws to protect workers rights and laws that don't bust unions, the jobs exist but they are not secure for the individual. 

Right to work and at will laws strip workers of their rights, reduce wages and benefits and allow the employer to have all the power.  This is what low wage Republican's love and I'm afraid we're going to see more of it.

[LongRider]

2 hours ago, mormont said:

And he wasn't done there!

 

I'll be burning the flag while my abortion is in progress Mr. Trump.  Why?  Because I am a NASTY woman. 

[Ice Queen]

51 minutes ago, Datepalm said:

There's evidence that ECD education is crucial, not just in preparing kids for pre/school, but possibly even in developing basic cognitive abilities. Defecits that open up before age 5 are much harder, or possibly even impossible, to close than ones that open later.

 

I'm on the fence about the need for pre-K education. Our kids spend most of their lives in school. What I really object to is homework in preschool, and yes, both of my kids had it. It's ludicrous. Where is the evidence that education at that age improves their chances of getting into college and future success (which is ill-defined anyway)? 

Maybe we should just let out kids be kids and let them explore their innate love of learning without making them hate school by shoving it down their throats. There's more than enough time for their lives to be that structured. 

Just my two cents on that. 

[OldGimletEye]

On education policy, one thing I think would be good would be for there to be pretty tough requirements that each school publish job placement rates, starting incomes, broken down by area of study.

And that information be easily accessible.

I do believe that better information tends to produce better outcomes.

[Ice Queen]

10 minutes ago, LongRider said:

Now I have to disagree with your statement "there is always job security."  There may always be jobs in the trades but that does not mean they are secure jobs for the workers.  Without good laws to protect workers rights and laws that don't bust unions, the jobs exist but they are not secure for the individual. 

Right to work and at will laws strip workers of their rights, reduce wages and benefits and allow the employer to have all the power.  This is what low wage Republican's love and I'm afraid we're going to see more of it.

That's an excellent point and I don't know what the solution is other than saying that we can't allow them to bust the unions...but that's been under way for 40 years, and we just handed them the means to do it in a Republican majority. Too few people outside of the trades appreciate what unions can do for workers, and that people died for that cause. They won't care, either, until ALL of their rights and protections are dismantled, and by then it will be too late. 

Edit: OVT was Occupational and Vo-Tech. Home Ec was part of that and everyone, girls and boys, had to take it. 

[Mlle. Zabzie]

4 minutes ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

I'm on the fence about the need for pre-K education. Our kids spend most of their lives in school. What I really object to is homework in preschool, and yes, both of my kids had it. It's ludicrous. Where is the evidence that education at that age improves their chances of getting into college and future success (which is ill-defined anyway)? 

Maybe we should just let out kids be kids and let them explore their innate love of learning without making them hate school by shoving it down their throats. There's more than enough time for their lives to be that structured. 

Just my two cents on that. 

It's all in how it is done.  I think preschool should be play based and should be a time of exploration and socialization beginning a love of learning, not a place with homework.  But that's me.

[Ice Queen]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

He's been President-elect for three weeks and he's already calling for revoking people's citizenship. When will the people who are downplaying the dangers of a Trump presidency going to wake up? 

Deep down, this is what they want. They truly believe that they'll be the lucky ones who are exempt from whatever Trump cooks up and they'll be the privileged class. It's like the preppers who believe that, despite all odds, they'll be among the survivors of a nuclear holocaust or comet strike. 

[Ice Queen]

3 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

It's all in how it is done.  I think preschool should be play based and should be a time of exploration and socialization beginning a love of learning, not a place with homework.  But that's me.

Four year olds with homework. It was nuts. I never made them do it and they both turned out just fine. Ditto the summer homework. As long as they read every night I never made them do that either. It's completely unnecessary in my view.

[Ice Queen]

11 minutes ago, LongRider said:

I'll be burning the flag while my abortion is in progress Mr. Trump.  Why?  Because I am a NASTY woman. 

Agreed. Part of the freedom we love so much is to be able to burn the flag in protest of something.

I'm sure Mr. Trump will be hearing from the ACLU sooner than he thinks.

[OldGimletEye]

Just now, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

Agreed. Part of the freedom we love so much is to be able to burn the flag in protest of something.

I'm sure Mr. Trump will be hearing from the ACLU sooner than he thinks.

Didn't ya hear, only the Second Amendment matters. The rest of the bill of rights can just go to hell, evidently.

[LongRider]

1 minute ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

That's an excellent point and I don't know what the solution is other than saying that we can't allow them to bust the unions...but that's been under way for 40 years, and we just handed them the means to do it in a Republican majority. Too few people outside of the trades appreciate what unions can do for workers, and that people died for that cause. They won't care, either, until ALL of their rights and protections are dismantled, and by then it will be too late. 

While I haven't worked it trades per se, I have worked in warehousing and have learned to love forklift drivers. Forklift drivers can be really skilled and while the work isn't in anyway glamorous, it's important.  I've seen wages and job security and all that slowly erode for them and it just pisses me off so much. 

Fighting right to work laws helps, but unions have been demonized for so long that understanding why a RtW law is pernicious is hard to explain anymore.   Sigh, this a huge issue for me, but it should be huge for the people who voted against their own self interest this time too. 

[Ice Queen]

Just now, OldGimletEye said:

Didn't ya hear, only the Second Amendment matters. The rest of the bill of rights can just go to hell, evidently.

Yes, well, us libtards believe in the Second Amendment, too. The Trumpsters had best keep that in mind. They're not the only ones with guns.