Urologist tells Obama supporters to go elsewhere

[quote name='cindersphere']We don't spend a ton on education, we scrape by with spending almost nothing. Privatizing the system will bring more problems that are already seen throughout private colleges.[/QUOTE]

What's the worst that would happen?

http://homepage.smc.edu/nestler_andrew/pepsi.jpg

pepsi.jpg
 
[quote name='cindersphere']We don't spend a ton on education, we scrape by with spending almost nothing. Privatizing the system will bring more problems that are already seen throughout private colleges.[/QUOTE]

We spend more than most other countries and get worse results (stupider children, more drop-outs, etc.). This is virtually the same criteria used to denounce our current health care system.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']OT, but...

Are you really lauding our educational system right now? And are you saying it would be more expensive to privatize it? I thoroughly disagree. We spend TONS on education right now, and have increased that amount reflexively over the past few decades, and yet we lag most developed countries in results. We have high costs NOW. We are turning out morons NOW. We need massive changes NOW.

I fully support privatizing the school system. Government should give each child a voucher for an accredited school for $10,000-$15,000. That's what most school systems are paying now (some, like the DC public schools, pay significantly more than that even). Don't tell me we can't get some talented and motivated people into teaching with $250,000+ going to each classroom for teacher salary, equipment, books, administration, etc.

Government is doing a rotten job right now. Why do home-schooled kids come out ahead? Why do private school kids come out ahead? At least partly because they have better teachers and better learning systems.[/QUOTE]

Actually no. I think privatizing schools would benefit some, but would make the problems even more noticable.

Home schooling works because parents are involved. Privatizing them would be fine, but the kids that just don't want to learn, won't anyways.

Who's going to work for the poor districts? or the rich districts? privatizing would rather see 1 BIG school than 1 for every community, bigger classrooms, mass farm education.

Private schools are better now, because they don't have public schools to to also control.

Plus the education standards are at least even, with Private schools, each themselves would have a different level of education, ways of teaching, etc...

If it was one massive company to do so, then maybe, but really... to compare, that would be like Fedex and UPS is to shipping, and I know my boxes aren't rosey from either company, would I trust my child to something like that?

Plus parents would have absolutely no control to a 'Business' vs public owned schools.


The true reason why our education sucks is we're spoiled and don't have the institution built into us for education (Parents, the edu system, businesses, and the entitlement that US has been raised up with) People are VERY comfortable to just work at flipping burgers or working at walmart, which is sad. I think the recession that's been going on and the point of very high employment has made a few realize that the idea of having just unskilled labor on your resume is a very bad idea in a poor economy, but I have to wonder if that will last.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Let me guess - you think you should be able to force someone to have a business relationship with you just like you believe other people should be forced to pay your bills and health care professionals should lose their right to freely choose who they wish to associate with and lose their right to protest? Why am I not surprised?[/QUOTE]
Let me put this in a way that you may be able to relate to. Lets say that some employees at your Wal-Mart store decide they want a union, the store manager finds out about this and those involved are fired because Wal-Mart feels that unions are detrimental to their business. Now do you take corporate's side and say they had the right fire them or side with your fellow employees? Lets even take it a step farther and say you were involved and are being fired.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']We spend more than most other countries and get worse results (stupider children, more drop-outs, etc.). This is virtually the same criteria used to denounce our current health care system.[/QUOTE]
Well with all the cuts to education maybe we can get that down to spending less and getting worse results. Then at least the results will make sense.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']We spend more than most other countries and get worse results (stupider children, more drop-outs, etc.). This is virtually the same criteria used to denounce our current health care system.[/QUOTE]

You do know that many countries separate out poor performing students and put them in vocational schools, don't you? If you take out the students less suited for high academic pursuits and give them realistic goals the results look alot peachier.

I'm not saying this is necessarily a bad idea. Some people enjoy the nuances of Homer's Odyssey, some think "Clash of the Titans" is high art. For the latter why not offer to teach them a trade while they are in school instead of trying to cram the canon down their throats.
 
[quote name='cindersphere']We don't spend a ton on education, we scrape by with spending almost nothing. Privatizing the system will bring more problems that are already seen throughout private colleges.[/QUOTE]

I'm afraid you're misinformed.

oecd.gif

pisa.jpg

Higher-Edu-Spending_1.jpg


We spend more than almost anyone and results have deteriorated rather than improved. Just spending more money isn't working. We need a fundamental reform, such as the privatization/voucher system I advocate.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']Let me put this in a way that you may be able to relate to. Lets say that some employees at your Wal-Mart store decide they want a union, the store manager finds out about this and those involved are fired because Wal-Mart feels that unions are detrimental to their business. Now do you take corporate's side and say they had the right fire them or side with your fellow employees? Lets even take it a step farther and say you were involved and are being fired.[/QUOTE]

I wouldn't like it, but I wouldn't start a lawsuit or anything.

Let me come up with a story. Let's say all the gas station owners in your area get together decide they want to start charging $7/gallon. Now, let's say a new gas station opens and they offer to sell you gas at $4/gallon. But, the government comes in and says you can't buy gas from this gas station - you have to buy from one of the other gas stations. Sound good to you?
 
[quote name='UncleBob'] Let's say all the gas station owners in your area get together decide they want to start charging $7/gallon. [/QUOTE]

Which is illegal, since that is price fixing.
 
How the hell does that relate to any of this? That's completely improbable and illegal, what i used was actually quite probable. It's good to know that you'll fight against big government but let corporate america run rough shot over you.
 
You know, a lot of those countries that spend less on higher education also have a free college education system. Higher populations are also going to mean more spending most likely.
 
[quote name='Strell']Which is illegal, since that is price fixing.[/QUOTE]

So, you mean a group of people getting together and demanding a particular price for their goods/services is illegal?

Yet when that group of people call themselves a "union", the government then allows it - and gives them special protection. Odd.

[quote name='JolietJake']You know, a lot of those countries that spend less on higher education also have a free college education system. Higher populations are also going to mean more spending most likely.[/QUOTE]

I'm not really sure how a higher population has to equate to higher per-student spending. But I'll remember this next time someone brings up the amount spent on health care in America vs. the amount spent in other countries. It's because we have more people.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']So, you mean a group of people getting together and demanding a particular price for their goods/services is illegal?

Yet when that group of people call themselves a "union", the government then allows it - and gives them special protection. Odd.[/quote]

Union refers to the workers trying to protect themselves from unethical behavior and practices by their employers.

Retailers fixing prices is illegal.

These things are not equivalent.
 
Groups of people getting together and demanding a set price for their services isn't equivalent to groups of people getting together and demanding a set price for their services. Gotcha.
 
Bob's logic:
groups of people are groups of people.
-ergo-
The Atlanta Braves are the Black Panthers.

*****

on education:

privatization won't do a thing except push more children to the bottom and cost more in the end.

education reform needs cultural reform. put away the video games, turn off your television, get off of facebook, put your goddamned cell phone down for a moment and read a book. help your child with their homework. practice. study what you don't know. examine, dispute, debate, criticize.

The US spends billions per year on diet products yet we're 2/3 obese based on BMI (yes, yes, BMI ain't a perfect measure, but we ain't a nation of bodybuilders, rendering the point moot). Why? Look at what we buy: slim fast shakes, diet pills, shake weights (!), Randy Couture tower 2000s, more pills, diet cola, and microwave meals.

We want results with no effort. Our national attitude towards health and weight echo our attitude towards education. That attitude is "gimmiegimmiegimmie." We want results and we want zero effort. We don't have time to *read* for class, we have lolcats to email to aunt betty and uncle cleotus. We don't have time to work out, we have to twitter that we're doing laundry, or use foursquare to tell our friends we're in the Wendy's drivethrough (we don't have time to cook, sorry).

It's called instant gratification and we swear by it. Zero-effort results are what we feel entitled to.

It's cultural, not financial.

As for higher education spending, that's gotta be tied up in athletics. The deprofessionalization of higher education teaching is a very real thing - I gotta fly out in the AM so I'm going to bed and can't be bothered to find the stats. The decline in tenured professors and tenure track professors have been responded to with a growth in adjunct professors (you'd make more money as a dishwasher, and I mean that literally) and grad student teachers (you pay thousands of dollars per year to be taught by grad students?). Your higher education dollars are giving you the bowl games and final fours y'all love so much. Higher education is fucked, but it's being cannibalized by athletics and administrations, *not* the faculty.
 
Tell you what. Why don't you go around and get all the local stores - including Walmart - to raise prices on a few arbitrary items. How about bananas. Make them all eight bucks each. Tell me how that goes, and then we'll get back to this whole non-equivalency thing.
 
I won't disagree that the government gives preferential treatment to different groups of people.

It doesn't change that if a group of people gets together and sets a fixed price for what they provide, it is fine and dandy as long as they call themselves a 'union'.
 
Is everybody agreed Mr. Vermin just crushed the "we spend more on public education and get poorer results" argument?

Bob, people forming an union are typically going after more than just higher wages.

Some of them want to stop working during breaks, some want to be paid for overtime, some want health care benefits over and above Medicaid, some want disability benefits in case of injuries instead of being chucked on the scrap heap, some want unemployment benefits when they are arbitrarily fired or laid off and some don't want to be sexually harassed and fired for reporting it.

Here's a link about the last one from less than two months ago:
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202443943768
 
[quote name='mykevermin']How long, historically speaking, have union contracts only been signed by the unions themselves?[/QUOTE]

Obviously the employer has to sign the agreement - but let's say the employer decided they didn't want to - and instead, wanted to purchase gas from the guy selling it for $4/gallon labor from someone offering it at a lower price? Just like you have the freedom to say to any business "We've had a good run, but from now on, I'm going to do business with someone else." - what happens with the employer in this case tries to do the same thing?

[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Bob, people forming an union are typically going after more than just higher wages.[/QUOTE]

When I decide to shop someplace, I typically consider more than just the price. Return policy, method of payment accepted, friendliness of the employees, cleanliness of the store, etc., etc. Often, when anyone enters into a business arrangement, they consider more than just the face value of the deal. So... ummm.. yeah?
 
[quote name='UncleBob']So, you mean a group of people getting together and demanding a particular price for their goods/services is illegal?

Yet when that group of people call themselves a "union", the government then allows it - and gives them special protection. Odd.



I'm not really sure how a higher population has to equate to higher per-student spending. But I'll remember this next time someone brings up the amount spent on health care in America vs. the amount spent in other countries. It's because we have more people.[/QUOTE]
Not per person you dink, over all. The more people you have to educate the more it's probably going to cost.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Obviously the employer has to sign the agreement - but let's say the employer decided they didn't want to - and instead, wanted to purchase gas from the guy selling it for $4/gallon labor from someone offering it at a lower price? Just like you have the freedom to say to any business "We've had a good run, but from now on, I'm going to do business with someone else." - what happens with the employer in this case tries to do the same thing?


[/QUOTE]The union may decide to strike and the company will most likely bring in scabs to take the striking worker's places.

See that's the thing, the company is free to not sign the union contract, but the fallout may not make it worth it to them. They aren't forced by any means.

Price fixing is illegal to protect the population from being taken advantage of. Of course that isn't capitalistic which means it must be socialistic.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']Not per person you dink, over all. The more people you have to educate the more it's probably going to cost.[/QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure when anyone says something about the amount we spend on education, they're referring to the per-student costs.

[quote name='JolietJake']The union may decide to strike and the company will most likely bring in scabs to take the striking worker's places.

See that's the thing, the company is free to not sign the union contract, but the fallout may not make it worth it to them. They aren't forced by any means.

Price fixing is illegal to protect the population from being taken advantage of. Of course that isn't capitalistic which means it must be socialistic.[/QUOTE]

The company isn't always free to not sign a union contract. You get into nasty things like that a Union can force binding arbitration via the government.
 
Well i wasn't alright, sometimes you need to step back and look at the big picture.

Yes they usually try to hash out a deal, bu it's not like they have to agree to something they don't want to. That's why it can take so long to agree on a contract. Neither side is really forced into anything, but they do try to come to agreement because of the consequences.
 
That's like saying that I'm not forced to pay taxes, but I do because of the consequences.

I'm going to start telling poor people they don't *have* to eat - they just choose to because they don't like the consequences.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']I'm pretty sure when anyone says something about the amount we spend on education, they're referring to the per-student costs.[/QUOTE]

Did you catch mykevermin's post including "As for higher education spending, that's gotta be tied up in athletics."? Yeah, that pretty much kills the mini debate within the debate.

[quote name='UncleBob']The company isn't always free to not sign a union contract. You get into nasty things like that a Union can force binding arbitration via the government.[/QUOTE]

I found http://www.workerfreedom.org/new-short-paper-shows-negative-pension-a3694 after googling "government forces binding arbitration".

"Most damaging, is that there are no limits in current labor provisions that restrict the use of mandatory binding arbitration being used to force employers to participate in failing multi-employer defined benefit pension plans or simple multiemployer pension plans, known as MEPPs."

Binding arbitration is bad because employers will have to fund pension plans. That deserves a "lol wat?". Those employees on pension plans took deferred compensation in exchange for a pension. The employer bet on the employee checking out early. The employee bet on living a long life after retiring. Not funding a pension is as bad as giving your current employee a cold check. Is that acceptable?

Can you provide a real example of "Binding arbitration is bad, m'kay?"
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Did you catch mykevermin's post including "As for higher education spending, that's gotta be tied up in athletics."? Yeah, that pretty much kills the mini debate within the debate.[/quote]

Regardless of what the spending is being used on, it doesn't change the fact that it is being spent.

And I don't think our Grade, Middle, Junior and, to some extent, High Schools around the country are spending 3/4ths of their budget on athletics - yet the US still spends more per-student than most countries in those grades as well.

Can you provide a real example of "Binding arbitration is bad, m'kay?"
Click to expand...

Binding arbitration is bad, m'kay."

I know that wasn't really what you were looking for, but it came to mind. ;)

More related to what you're looking for - look in your cell phone contracts, credit card disclosures, etc., etc. You'll find that you're subject to binding arbitration. Yet, most consumer's rights groups *hate, hate, hate* this. But, suddenly, when it's in the context of union contracts, it's all great?
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Regardless of what the spending is being used on, it doesn't change the fact that it is being spent.

And I don't think our Grade, Middle, Junior and, to some extent, High Schools around the country are spending 3/4ths of their budget on athletics - yet the US still spends more per-student than most countries in those grades as well.[/QUOTE]

You got me. Wait, no...

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-edumoney.htm

[quote name='UncleBob']
Binding arbitration is bad, m'kay."

I know that wasn't really what you were looking for, but it came to mind. ;)

More related to what you're looking for - look in your cell phone contracts, credit card disclosures, etc., etc. You'll find that you're subject to binding arbitration. Yet, most consumer's rights groups *hate, hate, hate* this. But, suddenly, when it's in the context of union contracts, it's all great?[/QUOTE]

Horrible example.

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/CNN_legal_analyst_Alleged_Halliburton_rapists_1212.html

"It says if there's any dispute arising out of your employment or related to your employment, that dispute doesn't go before a jury, doesn't go before trial judge, goes before an arbitrator."

Getting drugged, gang raped and locked in a shipping container is considered a "dispute" arising out of employment and/or related to being an employee? I would argue it is a crime. Man, those recruiters must have been awesome.

Do you have an example with some taste?
 
[quote name='UncleBob']That's like saying that I'm not forced to pay taxes, but I do because of the consequences.

I'm going to start telling poor people they don't *have* to eat - they just choose to because they don't like the consequences.[/QUOTE]
You don't, and that is why anyone eats, at least naturally.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']You know, I read that link - I don't see anything on it that compares our spending/results to the spending/results of other countries. Or that these schools are spending all the money on athletics.[/QUOTE]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/preps/football/2004-10-05-spending-how_x.htm

Sorry. I was going with this as an example first, but thought huppi proved JJ's population size point better. Now, that example doesn't point towards K-8 spending more money on sports. Of course, grade school, junior high school and high school are interconnected. So, spending money on a new football field drains from the same pool of money that could buy VR devices for second graders.

Here's some data that sucks:
http://www2.census.gov/govs/school/07f33pub.pdf
It doesn't break it down by grade.

For example, my daughter's school district charges $1200 for all day kindergarten and the average national cost of a student is $9000. I have a hard time believing the cost of half day kindergarten is $9000 just as much as I have a hard time believing that all day kindergarten is $10200.

[quote name='UncleBob'] Yeah, the rest of that post that you didn't comment on.[/QUOTE]

Good show, old man.

http://consumerist.com/2009/02/mand...the-worst-choose-your-own-adventure-ever.html

However, a crime > a dispute.

I have housework and studying. So, I'm giving up for now.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']on education:

privatization won't do a thing except push more children to the bottom and cost more in the end.

education reform needs cultural reform. put away the video games, turn off your television, get off of facebook, put your goddamned cell phone down for a moment and read a book. help your child with their homework. practice. study what you don't know. examine, dispute, debate, criticize.

The US spends billions per year on diet products yet we're 2/3 obese based on BMI (yes, yes, BMI ain't a perfect measure, but we ain't a nation of bodybuilders, rendering the point moot). Why? Look at what we buy: slim fast shakes, diet pills, shake weights (!), Randy Couture tower 2000s, more pills, diet cola, and microwave meals.

We want results with no effort. Our national attitude towards health and weight echo our attitude towards education. That attitude is "gimmiegimmiegimmie." We want results and we want zero effort. We don't have time to *read* for class, we have lolcats to email to aunt betty and uncle cleotus. We don't have time to work out, we have to twitter that we're doing laundry, or use foursquare to tell our friends we're in the Wendy's drivethrough (we don't have time to cook, sorry).

It's called instant gratification and we swear by it. Zero-effort results are what we feel entitled to.

It's cultural, not financial.

As for higher education spending, that's gotta be tied up in athletics. The deprofessionalization of higher education teaching is a very real thing - I gotta fly out in the AM so I'm going to bed and can't be bothered to find the stats. The decline in tenured professors and tenure track professors have been responded to with a growth in adjunct professors (you'd make more money as a dishwasher, and I mean that literally) and grad student teachers (you pay thousands of dollars per year to be taught by grad students?). Your higher education dollars are giving you the bowl games and final fours y'all love so much. Higher education is fucked, but it's being cannibalized by athletics and administrations, *not* the faculty.[/QUOTE]

You're right, cultural factors are more important than money. Our whole educational philosophy for the last 30-40 years has been based on money - more pay, more administrators, more counselors, lower class sizes, more and more money. And it's done diddly squat.

You say privatization will have bad results. Do you have any evidence to support that? If not it's just venturing a guess. I think privatization would mesh much better with our culture to bring about results than the current system. Think about it. Schools could be more specialized, more tailored towards the child's needs than they are now.

[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Is everybody agreed Mr. Vermin just crushed the "we spend more on public education and get poorer results" argument?[/QUOTE]

What are you talking about? He didn't address that at all. And why would he? It's a fact, not an argument. If you want to argue about whether we should privatize schools or not, please do so.
 
Funny you post that, since my initial thought when revisiting this thread for the first time since Friday was precisely that. I want to hear more BS reasons why the doc is a "racist" and has no morality for putting up his sign, not about unionization and privatization.
 
[quote name='Foxtrot0245']Funny you post that, since my initial thought when revisiting this thread for the first time since Friday was precisely that. I want to hear more outstanding reasons why the doc is a "racist" and has no morality for putting up his sign, not about unionization and privatization.[/QUOTE]

lawl, fixed.
 
Yay! Posting with a 4 year old in my lap.

How about privatizing school sports?

You know. Make school a place of learning and have all of the circuses of "bread and circuses" fame done on private property.

For example of sports sucking money away from teaching in grade school, my daughter's school wants people to buy Market Day so they can buy ... a new playground. There's nothing wrong with the playground now except it isn't the best.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Yay! Posting with a 4 year old in my lap.

How about privatizing school sports?

You know. Make school a place of learning and have all of the circuses of "bread and circuses" fame done on private property.

For example of sports sucking money away from teaching in grade school, my daughter's school wants people to buy Market Day so they can buy ... a new playground. There's nothing wrong with the playground now except it isn't the best.[/QUOTE]

Caitlyn is 4? Congratulations! :D

I'm with you on school sports. It's obscene that high schools spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on sports facilities that should be going to education. Let local sports clubs do their thing.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Caitlyn is 4? Congratulations! :D

I'm with you on school sports. It's obscene that high schools spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on sports facilities that should be going to education. Let local sports clubs do their thing.[/QUOTE]

The Boy is 4. Caitlyn is 7. 14 years to my escape.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top