but back to the thread topic though, yeah, i do think we'd be way better off if we ran things the way the european countries with nationalized education do.
we're using two different definitions of "classical education" - one centered on literature and one on math/science. the math/science one, which you are advocating, makes some sense - yes, some principles of mathematics and science have been around for a long time, BUT you still learn them even in our modern education system. in fact, you HAVE to learn them in order to do anything. in those subjects, the most important things are facts and the most up-to-date research.
the crucial information in math and science is then what people know now, and how we apply it now. of course, euclid and pythagoras up through ceva, heron, euler, whoever (i'm using geometers as examples because that's who i remember off the top of my head for mathematicians). you do not at all need an in-depth history of math and science to learn how to apply the principles laid out over the past several thousand years.
but back to the thread topic though, yeah, i do think we'd be way better off if we ran things the way the european countries with nationalized education do.
the irony to me is that it seems america would do better if all primary and secondary education was private (of course, only if everyone could afford it) and all post-secondary nationalized, whereas we have the opposite and all kinds of problems.
Only if you drop all standards for admittance, which is not necessary for a system of socialized tuition payment to work. You apply where you want... you choose your school... the goverment pays for it.
You would have to admit anyone who wants to go to college, though. Otherwise, you would be taxing people for an education system they have no access to because they may not be able to pass an entrance exam or something. Can you imagine the lawsuits then?
I do... but there are already limits on our rights for the good of society. It is part of the social contract. How different, really, is finally enforcing the idea that those who have more must pay their fair share for the good of the society that they have benefitted from so much.
The rich arleady pay more than their fair share, and are constantly asked to pay more. Oh, and in case you didn't know, "rich" means anyone making more than $200K a year. With the cost of living as it is today, especially for families, that's not "rich". You forget a lot of people live on credit, especially 'tweeners like that, six figure incomes with families that are almost rich but not quite.
I do... but there are already limits on our rights for the good of society. It is part of the social contract. How different, really, is finally enforcing the idea that those who have more must pay their fair share for the good of the society that they have benefitted from so much.
The rich arleady pay more than their fair share, and are constantly asked to pay more. Oh, and in case you didn't know, "rich" means anyone making more than $200K a year. With the cost of living as it is today, especially for families, that's not "rich". You forget a lot of people live on credit, especially 'tweeners like that, six figure incomes with families that are almost rich but not quite.
The rich only pay more than their fair share when you talk about folks making that little. There are people making far more who do not pay their fair share, often due to large tax loopholes. Also, a large number of corporations pay next to nothing to absolute nothing in taxes.
Only if you drop all standards for admittance, which is not necessary for a system of socialized tuition payment to work. You apply where you want... you choose your school... the goverment pays for it.
You would have to admit anyone who wants to go to college, though. Otherwise, you would be taxing people for an education system they have no access to because they may not be able to pass an entrance exam or something. Can you imagine the lawsuits then?
I'm just not getting your logic there. Being taxed for things you don't use or support happens all the damned time. In fact very little of your tax money goes to pay for services for you. I don't use local schools.. but I pay taxes for it. I don't use the dog catcher, fire fighters, or police (though it may happen at some point) but i still pay taxes for them. I don't drive.. but I still pay taxes for road repair, street signs, etc...
we're all paying taxes anyway for education right now, [as well as the penal system], especially if you own property, regardless of whether you have children, so i don't think it's too much to ask that the job be done right. in the end, ultimately, we all have to live with everyone else's kids when they grow up, so i think i'd rather have them all educated to the fullest of their abilities regardless of their parents' income, rather than having them doing meth and stealing groceries out of my garage.
also, the $2 trillion dollars we spent on the war in iraq could have paid for college for everyone well into 2100.
Originally posted by:crunkmoose The rich only pay more than their fair share when you talk about folks making that little. There are people making far more who do not pay their fair share, often due to large tax loopholes. Also, a large number of corporations pay next to nothing to absolute nothing in taxes.
Actually, I have to nitpick, because I think those people who make $200K are taxed too much. I agree that the upper middle class has more of a tax burden than the uber-rich.
As for corporations, they don't pay taxes, they pass the cost of those taxes on to the customer. That's why it amazes me every time when someone says, "soak the oil companies with a windfall profits tax". OK, fine, do that and you will just see them charge more for their products. Economics 101.
I'm just not getting your logic there. Being taxed for things you don't use or support happens all the damned time. In fact very little of your tax money goes to pay for services for you. I don't use local schools.. but I pay taxes for it. I don't use the dog catcher, fire fighters, or police (though it may happen at some point) but i still pay taxes for them. I don't drive.. but I still pay taxes for road repair, street signs, etc...
We define education in this country as a right. Every child has a right to an education. And you can bet that if we made colleges free (or at least state colleges because you couldn't mandate that private colleges admit people for free), there would be people demanding their right to a college education.
in the end, ultimately, we all have to live with everyone else's kids when they grow up, so i think i'd rather have them all educated to the fullest of their abilities regardless of their parents' income, rather than having them doing meth and stealing groceries out of my garage.
Right, because if you don't go to college, you will end up a thieving tweaker instead. But if you go to college, you will never end up committing crimes or abusing drugs.
also, the $2 trillion dollars we spent on the war in iraq could have paid for college for everyone well into 2100.
They raised that fictional number to $2 trillion? Last weel it was $1.5 trillion, before that it was about $500 billion. Oh well, anything to alarm the alarmists.
in the end, ultimately, we all have to live with everyone else's kids when they grow up, so i think i'd rather have them all educated to the fullest of their abilities regardless of their parents' income, rather than having them doing meth and stealing groceries out of my garage.
Right, because if you don't go to college, you will end up a thieving tweaker instead. But if you go to college, you will never end up committing crimes or abusing drugs.
also, the $2 trillion dollars we spent on the war in iraq could have paid for college for everyone well into 2100.
They raised that fictional number to $2 trillion? Last weel it was $1.5 trillion, before that it was about $500 billion. Oh well, anything to alarm the alarmists.
actually, loser, they raised it to $3 trillion. $1.5 is what has already been spent, and $500 billion is the lie that the president you and your republican buddies voted for said it would be before we went in.
Originally posted by:pudge
Right, because if you don't go to college, you will end up a thieving tweaker instead. But if you go to college, you will never end up committing crimes or abusing drugs.
didn't they cover that in that great law school of yours? here, let me explain for you: there are these things called "statistics", and yeah, there's a direct correlation between level of education and likelihood to commit crime. you're a fucking idiot.
actually, loser, they raised it to $3 trillion. $1.5 is what has already been spent, and $500 billion is the lie that the president you and your republican buddies voted for said it would be before we went in.
Wow.
I mean, just wow. Being called a loser and a fucking idiot? Someone must be new around here. Anyway, I hate to break your train of assumptions, but I didn't vote for Bush. I voted for Harry Browne twice in the last two presidential elections, respectively. Secondly, if you think for a minute things would be better had we elected Al Gore in 2000, or John Kerry in 2004, you might want to look in a mirror when you start calling names. Third, $1.5 trillion + $500 billion is $2 trillion. Fourth, the number is artificially inflated to make a political point. Fifth, if the Democrats who were voted in in 2006 had the courage of the convictions they ran on, they would simply vote to defund the war, override a Presidential veto, and presto! The war would be over. So, I hope you didn't vote for Democrats hoping that they would rise up against Bush and end the war by defunding it. Oh, a "non-binding resolution". That's the best you can do? That's about as stiff as Mike Ditka before Levitra.
didn't they cover that in that great law school of yours? here, let me explain for you: there are these things called "statistics", and yeah, there's a direct correlation between level of education and likelihood to commit crime. you're a fucking idiot.
No, I am just a guy who graduated high school and didn't go to college, and no law school either. However, even I know that they don't cover statistics in law school. Statistics aren't admissible as evidence in court.
Now, when you say that there is a correlation between education and crime, you're only telling part of the story. Only the broadest reading of statistics will give you your premise. Look deeper, and you will see that those most likely to commit crimes would be people who dropped out of school entirely. That's a little dishonest when the discussion is the free education system and whether or not it should be expanded to cover college.
It's also too easy to fall back on statistics, but they really don't prove anything. Statistics don't predict future events or patterns in behavior, they reflect things that already happened. And it's very easy to lie with statistics, to mix and match them to create false impressions.
The bottom line is that you are naive if you think that making college free is going to reduce crime. It won't. People have to want to take the next step in education- they have to want to take the first step, which is already free. There are enough government programs, grants, and loans available to people who lack the personal funds to cover tuition, and there are also government-funded AND privately-funded scholarships given to people based on scholastic or athletic achievement. If you want to point out that other countries have better test scores or are producing more scientists, engineers, and doctors, then look at their PRIMARY education system, which I will grant you is far better than the US public school system. They're much more rigorous and geared towards learning, not socialization. By the time those students reach college, they've already learned more than a US high school grad, and probably more than your average 4-year college grad. Plus, with a lot lower populations, alumni givebacks, private-sector alumni who volunteer to teach, and so on, they can afford to have free college.
Watch, go ahead. Make state college education free (like I s
You must be logged in to do that. Sign in or sign up free.
Quote
paying for college ››
(2)
