Crisis of democracy in the U.S.

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: Up To The Challenge

The United States has a long history of providing equal rights for education. The Constitution guarantees that all citizens have the right to an education, and there are many federal laws that prohibit discrimination in education based on race, color, national origin, sex, disability, and religion.

However, there are still some challenges to equal rights in education. For example, students from low-income families may not have the same opportunities as students from wealthy families. And students with disabilities may not have the same access to education as students without disabilities.

There are also some challenges to equal rights in education for students who are immigrants or refugees. These students may not speak English as a first language, and they may not have the same educational opportunities as students who were born in the United States.

Despite these challenges, the United States has made significant progress in providing equal rights for education. There are many laws and programs in place to help ensure that all students have the opportunity to receive a quality education.

Here are some of the key laws that protect equal rights in education in the United States:

• The Civil Rights Act of 1964: This law prohibits discrimination in education based on race, color, national origin, sex, and religion.
• The Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974: This law requires schools to provide equal educational opportunities to all students, regardless of their background.
• The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA): This law guarantees that all students with disabilities have the right to a free and appropriate education.
• The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB): This law was enacted in 2001 with the goal of improving the performance of all students, regardless of their background.

These laws have helped to ensure that all students in the United States have the opportunity to receive a quality education. However, there is still more work to be done to ensure that all students have equal access to education.

MayCaesar

I am not sure I understand what crisis you are referring to. Is there a single law in any jurisdiction within the US that restricts someone's right to receiving education that someone else can receive? I am only familiar with a number of educational opportunities only available to US Citizens with a certain level of clearance - however, those have been around for many decades, and I fail to see how they constitute a crisis today.

just_sayin

@JulesKorngold

However, there are still some challenges to equal rights in education. For example, students from low-income families may not have the same opportunities as students from wealthy families. And students with disabilities may not have the same access to education as students without disabilities.

What crisis?  Be more specific.  You made the vague claim about low-income families not having the same opportunities as students from wealthy families.  What does that mean?

A popular lie told is that there are huge spending disparities in rich schools versus poor schools.  This is not true and when you look at the lie you see that they are not considering all sources of funding but just focusing on one or two sources such as local funding.  From the Fordham Institute:

A 2017 Brookings Institution study conducted by Urban Institute’s Matt Chingos shows that progressive funding for schools goes back to at least the mid-1990s. When the Urban Institute itself used a somewhat different methodology to study school finance in 2022, they still found that funding was slightly progressive: “1 percent more funding is allocated to students from households in poverty nationwide than toward students from households not in poverty.” 

Did you catch that?  When all funding sources are included poorer school districts spend on average 1 percent more per student than do neighboring wealthier school districts.  And its been that way since the 1990s.

The University of Pennsylvania and the University of Delaware found that it is actually much more common for schools with poorer students to spend more than other schools in the same state—on average $529 more per student per year (that study uses free and reduced-price lunch qualification and census-based poverty metrics to operationalize student socioeconomic status (SES), with similar results using both measures).

So what exactly are you arguing?

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: My Response To Your Disinformation

@just_sayin

The crisis I am referring to is the educational funding disparity between rich and poor schools in the United States. This disparity is well-documented, and it has a significant impact on the opportunities available to students from different backgrounds.

For example, a study by the Education Trust found that schools in high-poverty areas receive, on average, $2,200 less per student than schools in low-poverty areas. This difference in funding translates into a number of disparities, including:

• Less qualified teachers: Schools in high-poverty areas are more likely to have teachers who are not fully certified or who lack experience.
• Less access to resources: Schools in high-poverty areas are more likely to lack access to resources such as textbooks, computers, and other educational materials.
• Less challenging curriculum: Schools in high-poverty areas are more likely to offer a less challenging curriculum, which can limit the opportunities for students to learn and grow.

These disparities have a significant impact on the educational outcomes of students from different backgrounds. For example, a study by the National Center for Education Statistics found that students from high-poverty areas are more likely to drop out of school and less likely to attend college.

The claim that there are no huge spending disparities between rich and poor schools is simply not true. The data shows that there is a significant difference in funding between schools in different communities, and this difference has a real impact on the opportunities available to students.

To address this crisis, we need to reform the way that schools are funded in the United States. We need to ensure that all students, regardless of their background, have access to quality education.

I agree that it is important to consider all funding sources when looking at school spending disparities. However, I would argue that the data you cite does not tell the full story.

First, the study you cite by the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Delaware only looked at a small number of states. It is possible that the results would be different if the study had looked at a larger sample of states.

Second, the study you cite did not control for other factors that could affect school spending, such as the cost of living in a particular area. It is possible that schools in high-poverty areas are simply more expensive to operate, due to factors such as the need to provide more social services to students.

Finally, the study you cite did not look at the quality of education that students receive in different schools. It is possible that schools in high-poverty areas are able to spend more money per student, but they are not able to use that money effectively.  It is also about the way that money is spent. Schools in high-poverty areas are more likely to spend their money on things like social services and remediation, while schools in low-poverty areas are more likely to spend their money on things like enrichment and extracurricular activities.

The data you cite does not provide a clear picture of the relationship between school spending and student outcomes. More research is needed to determine the true impact of school spending disparities on student achievement.

The difference in funding between rich and poor schools has a cumulative effect. Over time, schools in high-poverty areas will have fewer resources to attract and retain qualified teachers, and they will be less likely to offer challenging courses and extracurricular activities. This can lead to a cycle of poverty, as students from high-poverty areas are less likely to graduate from high school and go on to college.

The current system of school funding is unfair and inefficient. It is unfair because it means that students from high-poverty areas have fewer opportunities to succeed. It is inefficient because it means that we are not getting the most out of our education dollars.

I believe that these points provide a complete picture of the issue of school spending disparities. 

just_sayin

@JulesKorngold
You are very mistaken.

For example, a study by the Education Trust found that schools in high-poverty areas receive, on average, $2,200 less per student than schools in low-poverty areas. This difference in funding translates into a number of disparities, including:

Did this study include ALL FUNDING SOURCES: FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL?  No it did not.  Their webpage mentions state and local funding only.  Did you know that they were not including FEDERAL FUNDING?  I'm looking at https://edtrust.org/press-release/school-districts-that-serve-students-of-color-receive-significantly-less-funding/  . If that isn't the right site, please direct me to the one you are talking about.

The claim that there are no huge spending disparities between rich and poor schools is simply not true. The data shows that there is a significant difference in funding between schools in different communities, and this difference has a real impact on the opportunities available to students.

This is not true if you include all funding sources.  If you look at the state level, only New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Connecticut are SLEIGHTLY funding schools serving more low-income students LESS, but in the rest of the states, school funding is either equal or higher for the schools serving more low-income students.  And it has been the case since the 1990's!!

That's why the statement that poorer school districts actually spend 1 percent more per pupil is a true statement.

First, the study you cite by the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Delaware only looked at a small number of states. It is possible that the results would be different if the study had looked at a larger sample of states.

Huh?  No that is not true.  It was a national study with the data coming from the U.S. Department of Educations’ National Center for Education Statistics, Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) from the Office of Civil Rights and the 2018-19 National Education Resource Database on Schools (NERD$) from the Edunomics Lab at Georgetown University. (see pages 11-13 of the study - Find it here.

From the study:

Within states (Panel B.), Black, Hispanic, and economically disadvantaged students receive higher per-pupil expenditures than White and economically advantaged students, respectively. On average, Black and Hispanic students receive $514 and $115 more per pupil than White students, respectively, and FRL students and children in poverty (based on the SAIPE) receive $334 and $529 more than non-FRL student and non-poverty children, respectively. For all our subgroup comparisons, spending is much more progressive within rather than across states. 

The only situation where it holds true that poorer school districts are getting less than richer ones is if you compare across states.  But it isn't really fair to compare what a school district spends in Appalachia to what one spends in San Francisco or New York City.  Poor school districts are getting more per pupil than richer surrounding school districts.  

Your "crisis" is based on lie.

Further, some of the poorest and lowest performing school districts in the US spend the most per pupil.  For example DC spends $28,000 per pupil,  New York and Baltimore spend between $20,000 - $24,000.  

The issues are not as much about money, but methods and cultural factors.  For instance, in NYC within the same building are 2 inner city schools with 85% of the students being minority and low-income.  One is a regular public school it has about 15% of kids on grade level.  The other one statistically has poorer kids in it.  It is a KIPP charter school, it has 85% of its kids on grade level.  Guess which the Democratic mayor is trying to shut down?  Yep, the one that is having success and working with a fraction of the budget of the regular public school.  

Bogan

@JulesKorngold ;  

I really do not understand where Juleskorngold os going with this?      He seems to be suggesting that unless all education in the USA is “equal”, then this is a threat to democracy?

Look, Jules.    Here in Australia, educational opportunities are not equal.       As I have written before, in the Northern Territory, 66% of the NT education budget goes to educate 33% of students of “aboriginal” descent for a 90% failure rate in national (NAPLAN) examinations.     The “solution” according to leftist activists is “more money, more money, more money” to “close the gap” which never, ever closes.

Hey Jules.    Wouldn’t it be more sensible to just admit that some groups of people have low IQ and no amount of education or money can change that?     Why waste time and money educating children with low IQ who hate school anyway, and never even try to do their homework because they are just too lazy and not interested?    Wouldn’t it not be better to invest the money in educating your best and brightest, who may be able to make something of themselves, which would contribute to the common wealth?

Juleskorngold quote     For example, a study by the Education Trust found that schools in high-poverty areas receive, on average, $2,200 less per student than schools in low-poverty areas.

Sounds like somebody in the USA is thinking straight?    Here in Australia, we waste enormous amounts of education money trying to make silk purses out of sows ears.

Juleskorngold quote     This difference in funding translates into a number of disparities, including:         Less qualified teachers: Schools in high-poverty areas are more likely to have teachers who are not fully certified or who lack experience.

 ‘High poverty areas” are another way of saying “high crime, low IQ areas".     Such low IQ electors vote Democrat, who seem to like the idea of having woke, left wing  activist types as teachers who “teach” their students that their poverty is all the white guys fault.    Such activists seem to make very poor teachers.     But US electors get what they vote for.

 

· Juleskorngold quote     Less access to resources: Schools in high-poverty areas are more likely to lack access to resources such as textbooks, computers, and other educational materials.

 Probably because the Democrat electors in these areas make themselves poor by rioting at every excuse and burning down their factories, offices, shops, and schools, and looting the stores.       That drives away business which makes the area poorer.    Meanwhile, the Democrat administrators their politicians use seem to do alright, thank you very much.    One youtube vid I watched on Detroit recently showed that although Detroit students marks were woeful, Detroit teachers were among the best paid in the USA.

 

 Juleskorngold quote      Less challenging curriculum: Schools in high-poverty areas are more likely to offer a less challenging curriculum, which can limit the opportunities for students to learn and grow.

 Of course kids from low IQ areas will have a less challenging curriculum.     The “challenging” curriculum should go to the kids who are smart and who will work hard to get good marks.      Any kid from a low IQ area who shows promise and an adequate IQ should be encouraged with scholarships and special schools.     As far as I know, this is what has happened in most western countries for decades, if not hundreds of years. 

 In Sydney, Australia, we can see the futility of trying to make education “equal.”     The importation of very violent and low IQ ethnic groups into Australia after the abolishment of the White Australia Policy saw many of the groups gravitate to former working class areas in the south west of Sydney.       The south west of Sydney became a ghetto war zone with members of the NSW Police calling it “The Gaza Strip.”     In six of the high schools in this area, the NSW education department was forced to employ permanent on site security guards to protect students and teachers from violent students and parents.

 Teachers in these schools had their cars routinely vandalised.    Female teachers were threatened with rape by students.      One reason why it was hard to recruit new teachers in NSW, was because the activist class teachers always managed to get the plum teaching jobs in leafy, beach side suburbs full of well behaved white kids, while new teachers were always assigned to the “troubled” south west.      Left wing teachers may fight for the rights of violent ethnicities, but somebody else can teach them.     New teacher resignations from the profession became endemic.      “Relief” teachers from employment agencies flatly refused to work in many notorious schools in Sydney’s south west.  Do you blame them?   

 I dunno, Jules?    You seem to be off with the fairies again.       

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: Low IQ

@Bogan said:  Wouldn’t it be more sensible to just admit that some groups of people have low IQ and no amount of education or money can change that?     Why waste time and money educating children with low IQ who hate school anyway, and never even try to do their homework because they are just too lazy and not interested?    Wouldn’t it not be better to invest the money in educating your best and brightest, who may be able to make something of themselves, which would contribute to the common wealth?

I understand your point of view, but I disagree. I believe that everyone, regardless of their IQ, deserves the opportunity to receive a quality education. There are many factors that contribute to a child's success in school, including their IQ, their motivation, and their environment. While IQ is a factor, it is not the only factor.

There are many examples of people with low IQs who have achieved great things:

• Muhammad Ali: Ali was an American boxer who had an IQ of around 78, which is considered to be below average. However, he was a gifted athlete and boxer. He won the heavyweight championship of the world three times and is considered to be one of the greatest boxers of all time. Ali was also a civil rights activist and a vocal opponent of the Vietnam War. He was stripped of his boxing titles and imprisoned for refusing to serve in the military, but he eventually regained his titles and became a symbol of hope and inspiration for people all over the world.
• Chris Packham: Packham is an English naturalist and television presenter who has an IQ of around 70. He has dyslexia and Asperger syndrome. Packham was diagnosed with dyslexia at the age of 7, and he was diagnosed with Asperger syndrome at the age of 16. However, he was able to overcome his challenges and become one of the most popular naturalists in the United Kingdom. He has presented several television series, including "Springwatch," "Autumnwatch," and "Winterwatch."
  
• Temple Grandin: Grandin is an American animal scientist and autism activist. She has an IQ of around 70, which is considered to be borderline intellectual functioning. However, she has made significant contributions to the field of animal science. She developed the "Grandin squeeze machine," which is a device that is used to calm down agitated animals. She is also a professor at Colorado State University and has written several books about autism.
  
• Chris Burke: Burke is an American actor who has an IQ of around 75. He also has Down syndrome. Burke was diagnosed with Down syndrome at birth, but he was able to overcome his challenges and become a successful actor. He starred in the television show "Life Goes On" from 1989 to 1993, and he has appeared in several other films and television shows.
  
• Mattie Stepanek: Stepanek was an American author, poet, and motivational speaker who had an IQ of around 70. He also had autism and muscular dystrophy. Stepanek was diagnosed with autism at the age of 3, and he was diagnosed with muscular dystrophy at the age of 5. However, he was able to overcome his challenges and become a successful author and speaker. He wrote several books, including "My Life, My Hope, My Purpose," and he gave speeches all over the world.
  
• Stephen Wiltshire: Wiltshire is a British artist who has autism. He has an IQ of around 50, which is considered to be severely intellectually disabled. However, he has a photographic memory and is able to draw detailed and accurate renderings of cities after seeing them for only a short time. He has traveled all over the world and has drawn some of the most famous cities in the world, including London, New York, and Rome.
  

I believe that it is important to invest in all children, regardless of their IQ. This is because education is not just about preparing people for the workforce. It is also about developing their critical thinking skills, their problem-solving skills, and their ability to contribute to society.

I believe that everyone has the potential to learn and grow. With the right support, even children with low IQs can achieve great things.

Here are some additional arguments that I would make in response to your points:

• There is no clear consensus on the extent to which IQ is fixed. Some studies have found that IQ is relatively stable over time, while others have found that it can be changed through interventions.
• Even if IQ is fixed, there are still many benefits to education for people with low IQs. Education can help people with low IQs develop their skills and knowledge, which can lead to better jobs and a better quality of life.
• Investing in all children, regardless of their IQ, is good for society as a whole. A more educated population is a more productive population, and it is also a more tolerant and understanding population.

I believe that these arguments provide a more complete picture of the issue of education and IQ. 

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: Poor People and IQ

@Bogan

There is no evidence to suggest that poor people have lower IQs than wealthy people. In fact, some studies have shown that there is no correlation between IQ and income. However, there are a number of factors that can contribute to poverty, such as lack of access to education, poor health, and discrimination. These factors can also affect IQ scores.

It is important to remember that IQ is just one measure of intelligence. There are many other factors that contribute to success in life, such as hard work, determination, and creativity. With the right support, anyone can achieve their dreams, regardless of their income or IQ score.

Here are some additional things to consider:

• IQ tests are not perfect measures of intelligence. They can be biased against certain groups of people, such as those from low-income backgrounds.
• There is a lot of variation in IQ scores within any population group. Some people from low-income backgrounds will have high IQs, and some people from wealthy backgrounds will have low IQs.
• IQ is not a fixed trait. It can change over time, depending on factors such as education, nutrition, and health.

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: Sydney's Southwest Side

@Bogan

I do not blame teachers for refusing to work in schools in Sydney's southwest. The conditions described are appalling, and no one should be expected to work in an environment where they are not safe.

The statement that the importation of "very violent and low IQ ethnic groups" into Australia is to blame for the problems in Sydney's southwest is a dangerous and harmful generalization. It is important to remember that not all members of any group are the same, and that there is a great deal of diversity within ethnic groups. To say that all members of a particular ethnic group are violent or have low IQs is simply not true, and it is a dangerous form of stereotyping.

It is also important to remember that the problems in Sydney's southwest are complex, and there is no single cause. Poverty, lack of opportunity, and social exclusion all play a role in creating the conditions that lead to violence and unrest. To blame these problems on the ethnicity of the people living in these areas is simplistic and unhelpful.

We need to address the root causes of the problems in Sydney's southwest if we want to make a real difference. This means investing in education and opportunity, and breaking down the barriers that prevent people from participating fully in society. It also means challenging stereotypes and promoting understanding between different groups.

Bogan

@JulesKorngold

Juleskorngold quote     The statement that the importation of "very violent and low IQ ethnic groups" into Australia is to blame for the problems in Sydney's southwest is a dangerous and harmful generalization.

 It is also an accurate generalisation.      Just in case you have trouble seeing reality, please note that it is these same ethnicities which are a dysfunctional crime and welfare problem in every western country.

 Juleskorngold wrote      It is important to remember that not all members of any group are the same, and that there is a great deal of diversity within ethnic groups.

 Yet despite this so called “diversity”, the same groups are a problem everywhere, including withing their own dysfunctional homelands.     That sure looks like homogeneity beats diversity to me. 

 

Juleskorngold quote     To say that all members of a particular ethnic group are violent or have low IQs is simply not true, and it is a dangerous form of stereotyping.

Struth Jules, (which is old English for “God’s truth) I hardly know where to start refuting that statement.      To begin with, the idea that stereotyping is wrong is absolute bunkum.     People stereotype to think.      Most people when they talk about anything, talk in generalizations.   Everybody does it.    Please, please, please, tell me that you never stereotype.    Because in future I am going to amuse myself pointing out that you do it yourself, if you do.

 IQ testing has been around for over a hundred years and the results of that testing has proven that African/Americans are on average have 15 IQ points lower IQ than whites.      You seem to be suggesting that ethnic groups have exactly the same propensity for genetically prone violence as each other?   Could you support your premise with a reasoned argument proving your premise, please?     I can support my premise simply by pointing out that most people in jail are there for crimes of violence, and African Americans are very disproportionately represented in prison incarceration.  

 

Juleskorngold quote   It is also important to remember that the problems in Sydney's southwest are complex, and there is no single cause.

Now let’s see.     50 years ago, these suburbs were white working class suburbs with white working class crime rates.     The problem began for Sydney with the importation of Lebanese “refuges” at the time of the Lebanese civil war.     These people were settled in public housing estates in the south west of Sydney.    Immediately, this caused a spike in violent crime and car theft.     Cause and effect?    Australians, especially young women, were harassed and insulted on the streets.     In the year 2000, 70 Australian girls were gang raped by Muslim race hate rape packs.     This began “white flight” from the south west to outer suburbs of Sydney, to escape the fear, intimidation, and crime by Muslims towards white Australians.    

Police Sergeant Tim Priest commented in the media that the Lebanese were unlike any other immigrant group the NSW Police had ever encountered.      Arresting a Lebanese offender would usually result in an all out brawl between arresting officers and the offenders family.    In addition, while every other ethnic criminal usually preyed upon their own ethnic groups, the Lebanese criminals delighted in always targeting Australians, who they appeared to hate.

 No prizes for guessing which particular ethnic group is the most troublesome in NSW schools?      At least for the time being.    The importation of Sudanese and Somali “refugees” similarly caused serious spikes in crime around areas where these people were settled.      This is after the Australian government helpfully purchased houses for sale in these areas, gave each family $15,000 dollars to buy furniture and white goods, put them on the dole ,and gave them completely free medical insurance.   It got so bad with Somalis and Sudanese that in an unusual show of bipartisanship, both sides of parliament agreed to suspend “refugee” intakes from Sudan and Somalia “because of particular difficulties in integrating such people.”

 The ability of lefties like yourself to simply ignore reality is probably the primary reason why I stopped being a young lefty.     When are you going to grow up?

 

Juleskorngold    Poverty, lack of opportunity, and social exclusion all play a role in creating the conditions that lead to violence and unrest.

Complete and utter rubbish, Jules.    After WW2, Australia opened it’s doors to a flood of European refuges who often arrived with nothing, and who were housed in old military camps with little comfort.     White European refugees never acted like that.        Australia never experienced a Dutch, Irish, French, English, or Swedish crime wave.    

  

Juleskorngoldquote    To blame these problems on the ethnicity of the people living in these areas is simplistic and unhelpful.

It is simple because it is simple.    It is funny the extent that well meaning people of zeal like your good self will go to deny reality.

 

 Juleskorngold quote    We need to address the root causes of the problems in Sydney's southwest if we want to make a real difference. This means investing in education and opportunity, and breaking down the barriers that prevent people from participating fully in society. It also means challenging stereotypes and promoting understanding between different groups.

 I agree.   The first thing we need to do is to acknowledge self evident reality and realise that some ethnic groups make much better citizens in western societies than others.    I suppose you prefer to wait until your own suburb is burning like France before you acknowledge what you fear to see?     You must be a public servant, Jules?   Becasue your ANSWER TO EVERYTHING is for the government to just throw money at the problem.   And the more useless, crime and welfare prone ethnicities in western society, the better the election chances of the left.   And the more expensive "programs" to "solve" the problems the left causes with it's immigration policies.   That does not seem to have worked anywhere.     I think it is time to start thinking straight and realise that, generally speaking (there can be exceptions)  some ethnicities are just too du-mb and violent to prosper in western society.

Before we end up like France.  

JulesKorngold

@Bogan

I disagree with your statement that some ethnicities are just too dumb and violent to prosper in Western society. This is a dangerous and harmful generalization that is not supported by evidence.

There are many people of all ethnicities who are intelligent and successful in Western society. In fact, there are many examples of people from ethnic minorities who have made significant contributions to Western culture and society.

To say that all members of a particular ethnic group are dumb or violent is simply not true, and it is a dangerous form of stereotyping. It is important to remember that not all members of any group are the same, and that there is a great deal of diversity within ethnic groups.

We should not make assumptions about people based on their ethnicity. Instead, we should judge people as individuals and focus on their individual merits.

It is also important to remember that Western society is a diverse society, and that it has been shaped by the contributions of people from all over the world. To say that some ethnicities are not suited to Western society is to deny the contributions of these people and to undermine the very fabric of our society.

bluesky

@JulesKorngold ; You pointed out that``the U.S. has a long history of providing equal rights for education. 
The Constitution gurantees that all citizens have the right to an education, and there are many federal laws that 
prohibited discrimination in education based on race, color, national origin , sex, disability and religion.``
Your comment is right. However, unfortunately serious problem has emerged.   
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ``banned the use of race and ethnicity in university admissions, dealing a major blow to a decade- old practice that boosted educational opportunities for African Americans and other minorities.``(The Japan Times, July 1-2, 2023)

This means that affirmative action policies are no longer allowed. 
I believe that this unfair decision by top U.S. court may trigger anger, a sense of discrimination toward society 
among younger generation coming to the U.S. from many parts of the world. 
     

Bogan

@JulesKorngold

Juleskorngold quote     I disagree with your statement that some ethnicities are just too dumb and violent to prosper in Western society. This is a dangerous and harmful generalization that is not supported by evidence.

 On the contrary, my dear Mr Korngold, the evidence is overwhelming and obvious.     Could I suggest that if you disagree with me, then your premise must be that all races must be equal?     If not, please state exactly what you believe?  

 The idea that all races are equal is easily disproved.     If you think that they are equal, then by what reasoned logic have you come to that conclusion?  I suspect it is just an idea implanted into your head as a kid by your teachers, parents, and peers.   This idea,  you have accepted and internalised as an Absolute Truth, without ever bothering to think about it and wonder if it was true?

 

Juleskorngold quote     There are many people of all ethnicities who are intelligent and successful in Western society. In fact, there are many examples of people from ethnic minorities who have made significant contributions to Western culture and society.

 I agree that there are intelligent people in all races and ethnicities, and good, non violent  people too.  And these people can be successful and valued members of a society.   The problem is, that some ethnicities have bell curves of intelligence much lower than those of other races, and that these same ethnicities have a much higher proportion of people who are genetically prone to violent behaviour.

 

Juleskorngold quote   To say that all members of a particular ethnic group are dumb or violent is simply not true, and it is a dangerous form of stereotyping.

I am not saying that all members of a group are du-mb or violent, only that certain notoriously dysfunctional races have a much higher proportion of people within their ranks who have both a low intelligence and a genetic predisposition to violence.     As for stereotyping, if I were to say that the Chinese have a strong work ethic, or that Jews are smart, or Italians have a flair for design, you would not object to me stereotyping them.     It is only when somebody negatively stereotypes certain groups of people that liberals object.   This equates to saying that positive stereotypes are okay, but negative stereotypes are not.    Such a premise is intellectually bankrupt. Especially since it is considered perfectly okay to say whatever negative things you can think up about the white race, it is only non whites who are beyond criticism.

 

Juleskorngold quote      It is important to remember that not all members of any group are the same, and that there is a great deal of diversity within ethnic groups.

But the problem remains that people have to asses the level of danger, the trustworthiness, reliability, intelligence, and suitability of individuals all the time.    This can be an everyday event.    And since we do not know everything about everybody, then assessing a person’s character based upon their group associations reputation is both valid and reasonable.    

 

Juleskorngold quote    We should not make assumptions about people based on their ethnicity. Instead, we should judge people as individuals and focus on their individual merits.

Well , to start with, that does not apply to white people.     There are two racist explanations for minority dysfunction in western society.     The most prevalent is “blame the white guy for everything”, which is now being taught in schools as a fact as CRT.

 Second, while you claim that you do not judge people by the colour of their skin, I doubt if you intend to walk through the south side of Chicago at night?     My favourite racist stereotype comes from the Reverend Jesse Jackson of NAACP fame, who has been quotes as saying “Whenever I walk through Washington at night, I feel much safer knowing that there is a white man behind me, than a black.”     That is stereotyping for reasons of self preservation, and it is both reasonable and valid.     

 

Juleskorngold quote     It is also important to remember that Western society is a diverse society, and that it has been shaped by the contributions of people from all over the world. To say that some ethnicities are not suited to Western society is to deny the contributions of these people and to undermine the very fabric of our society.

I don’t know what contributions to western society that Arabs or Africans have made?    Unless you walk around with your eyes wired shut, then the entire modern world with it’s resulting incredible prosperity was all the work of the white race.    And I include Jews in that.    The Jews have always punched well above their numbers when it comes to scientific research.    Why?   Because as a race, the Jews are the smartest race around.  That does not mean that they are all smart, it is just that the Jews have a much higher proportion of intellectually gifted people than other races. 

Dreamer

Argument Topic: There is inequality, but for now I tend to focus on rich vs poor.

@bluesky

We can break down inequality into gender, sexual orientation, national origin, religion, disability, neurotypical, and then the nightmare of intersectionality. Are Black Hispanics being treated fairly? What about disabled Pacific Islanders?

At the end there is too many combinations to even keep track of. Yes, of course Black woman are more discriminated against than Black men and understanding intersectionality is good. Yet, there is something for the simplicity of simply raising the minimum wage and a race blind transfer of wealth.

“A serious and entirely race-blind transfer of wealth to poor people (even just the $15 dollar an hour minimum wage and even though the majority of people working for minimum wage are white) would do more to benefit poor black people than would the most rigorous and effective enactment and enforcement of every possible antidiscrimination law.”

Overturning our existing hierarchy—rather than just playing musical chairs with its demographics—depends on ending exploitation."

https://newrepublic.com/article/156032/diversity-training-isnt-enough-pamela-newkirk-robin-diangelo-books-reviews

The danger I see is that we might end up playing musical chairs with various disenfranchised groups. We might say it is Blacks and help them, then it is Hispanics, next intersectionality Black Hispanics, whoops we forgot the LGBTQIA+, afterwards people with disabilities, then Muslims, and not really solve anything and end up pitting minoritized groups against each other. How do you even compare the prejudice of fat shaming against another group?

just_sayin

@bluesky

This means that affirmative action policies are no longer allowed. 
I believe that this unfair decision by top U.S. court may trigger anger, a sense of discrimination toward society 
among younger generation coming to the U.S. from many parts of the world. 

Affirmative Action policies were found incantational because they are racist and discriminate against people of certain ethnicities.  Getting rid of it is justice.  It is not unfair to remove racist policies.  I am sure that some are angry that a racist policy that they supported has been outlawed.  But racists have a long history of being angry when people outlaw their racism.

The just response for colleges and universities is to repent of the racism they engaged in.  Unfortunately, I don't sense that many are repentant for their immoral conduct and will just find more covert ways to discriminate.

Not only do racist Affirmative Action policies discriminate against Asians and whites, they harm some minority students.  These universities seem more concerned about their virtue signaling on their diversity rating, but don't seem worried that Black students are twice as likely to drop out of college and even though Black students enter STEM degrees in higher percentages than white students, they are more than twice as likely to switch to lower paying degrees.  These schools have set many minority students up for failure by allowing them into programs that the student was a match for the academic level of the program.  I truly believe that minority students who found themselves in programs too difficult for them have a class action lawsuit case to make that they were the victims of Affirmative Action also.

just_sayin

@Dreamer

We can break down inequality into gender, sexual orientation, national origin, religion, disability, neurotypical, and then the nightmare of intersectionality. Are Black Hispanics being treated fairly? What about disabled Pacific Islanders?
At the end there is too many combinations to even keep track of. Yes, of course Black woman are more discriminated against than Black men and understanding intersectionality is good. Yet, there is something for the simplicity of simply raising the minimum wage and a race blind transfer of wealth.
“A serious and entirely race-blind transfer of wealth to poor people (even just the $15 dollar an hour minimum wage and even though the majority of people working for minimum wage are white) would do more to benefit poor black people than would the most rigorous and effective enactment and enforcement of every possible antidiscrimination law.”
Overturning our existing hierarchy—rather than just playing musical chairs with its demographics—depends on ending exploitation."
https://newrepublic.com/article/156032/diversity-training-isnt-enough-pamela-newkirk-robin-diangelo-books-reviews
The danger I see is that we might end up playing musical chairs with various disenfranchised groups. We might say it is Blacks and help them, then it is Hispanics, next intersectionality Black Hispanics, whoops we forgot the LGBTQIA+, afterwards people with disabilities, then Muslims, and not really solve anything and end up pitting minoritized groups against each other. How do you even compare the prejudice of fat shaming against another group?

I was so excited when I started reading your post and thought you were going to make a great point how intersectionality should not be the source of authority but a system of justice based on not showing favoritism and partiality.  Instead you pivoted to minimum wage and made me cringe.

I know we have been through this before but let's go through it again.  Minimum wage increases disproportionately hurt Black workers.  Now I'm sure you are aware of the minimum wages' history of racism.  It was first implemented to hurt Black construction workers.  (See Forbes and Medium).  And still today minimum wage hikes hurt low skilled workers, Black males, and ex-cons.  

A University of Washington Study showed "Seattle’s minimum wage ordinance appears to have delivered higher pay to experienced workers at the cost of reduced opportunity for the inexperienced."  It found that AFTER the minimum wage hike, minimum wage workers were on average making $125 a month LESS.  As a result of the wage hike companies reduced hours, benefits, and even jobs.  Especially hard hit were Black workers.

The majority of minimum wage studies show that it NEGATIVELY impacts wages of those making the minimum wage.  From the summary of the studies:

Summarizing the research literature this way, our key conclusions are as follows:
• There is a clear preponderance of negative estimates in the literature. In our data, 79.2% of the estimated employment elasticities are negative, 53.8% are negative and significant at the 10% level or better, and 46.2% are negative and significant at the 5% level or better.
• This evidence of negative employment effects is stronger for teens and young adults, and more so for the less-educated.
• The evidence from studies of directly-affected workers points even more strongly to negative employment effects.
• The evidence from studies of low-wage industries is less one-sided, with 64.5% of the estimated employment elasticities negative, but only 32.3% negative and significant at the 10% level or better, and the same percent negative and significant at the 5% level or better. 

...In its totality, this body of evidence and its conclusions point strongly toward negative effects of minimum wages on employment of less-skilled workers, especially for the types of studies that would be expected to reveal these negative employment effects most clearly.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that it would eliminate 1.3 to 3.7 million jobs altogether, and disportionately hurt teens and those with the lowest skills.  

In NYC minimum wage hikes have cost tens of thousands of restaurant jobs.  In just the first three months of a minimum wage hike, 4,000 workers lost jobs at full-service restaurants, Bureau of Labor Statistics data showed

I don't understand your support of a policy that the vast majority of studies show that it hurts, rather than helps, the very people it targets.  Why is is OK to you to take away a minimum wage workers benefits, work hours, and even their job?  That's what happens.  Especially to low skilled workers and ex-cons.  Why do you want to take away rungs on the ladder of success that low skilled and ex-cons need to help them move up?  In short, why do you support a policy that hurts poor people?  

Bogan

@bluesky ;  Quote   I believe that this unfair decision by top U.S. court may trigger anger, a sense of discrimination toward society 
among younger generation coming to the U.S. from many parts of the world. 

To begin with, since when did anti racists think that discriminating against people according to their skin colour "unfair"?

Second, why do so many "young people" from dysfunctional third world countries all want to barge into the USA (and every other western country) if the system is so supposedly "unfair"?    The solution looks to me, to stop importing young people from dysfunctional countries so that they can not get "angry" if the US constitution will not give them a free kick.

John_C_87

@bluesky

The issues of education are riddled with imperfections of United States Consitutional states of the Union. Many laws legilsated by state are challanged on basic legal grounds of right and wrong. The leading question of truth set by education is in a spoken connection to the cost of free speech. The listed cost of freedom of speech in the 1st amdendment is filed grievance requestion to state of the union of no cost to be openly shared. Is no cost fact or lie? Penalty of felony crime is a cost even if not prosicuted at the time of commiting the crime.

The Constitution guarantees that all citizens have the right to an education, and there are many federal laws that.No, I'm sorry the United States Constitution has no such rights assigned to citizen it is delegated to participants of the united state of search, be it by Article, Section, or Amendment. The only point of fact set in writing of Amendment made to United States Constitution by the way of legislation plus ratification is directed as a power sent to the states with a requirement of appropriate legislation as a key for success. The problem is created by the sharing of phrases that appear in Amendments to Constitution. The reason for the use of the phrase is to try to use the 10th Amendment to set a chain of command to law. The 13 Amendment Section II, Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. 14th Amendment Section V, The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. 15th Amendment Section 2, The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. 19th Amendment, Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. All are saying the same thing over, over, and over again this type of legislation calls into question the nature of what is to be considered appropriately written legislation. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. For the record all powers of the united Sates Constitution are in advance delegated to the people, by the people as a means of establishing the more perfect state of the union to a series of official qualifications of fact.9th Amendment, the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. 

: the act or process of counting something or a count made of something ( meaning numbers of assignment of Amendments, Article, or Section )
Enumeration Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people(The rights retained by the people are described verbatim)

(PREAMBLE) We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.U.S. Constitution - The Preamble | Resources | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

John_C_87

@bluesky

I understand your connection to the many issues surrounding American Democracy to be disconnected to a perfect state of the union with established justice. It is understood that the nature of repetitive legislation in Constitutional Amendments is far more detrimental to establishment of truth and fact in established legislation than you have been instructed. For whatever reasoning.

John_C_87

@just_sayin

So are we saying a more expensive economy is not a inflation set on work force size or GNP?

The issue here is Civil lawsuits are part of a GNP but are subject to volatile and abrupt changes in financial shifts. Meaning they can crash when overturned, this does not mean the litigations are to big too fail. 

just_sayin

@John_C_87
My apologizes, I have a hard time understanding what you are saying.  You mentioned GNP.  I think you are referring to GDP.  estimate from the CBO for a $15 minimum wage impact on the US economy.  Here is the quote from their report:

The $15 option would affect family income in a variety of ways. In CBO’s estimation, it would:

• Boost workers’ earnings through higher wages, though some of those higher earnings would be offset by higher rates of joblessness;
• Reduce business income and raise prices as higher labor costs were absorbed by business owners and then passed on to consumers; and
• Reduce the nation’s output slightly through the reduction in employment and a corresponding decline in the nation’s stock of capital (such as buildings, machines, and technologies).

On the basis of those effects and CBO’s estimate of the median effect on employment, the $15 option would reduce total real (inflation-adjusted) family income in 2025 by $9 billion, or 0.1 percent.1
1. That dollar amount and others in this report are expressed in 2018 dollars, unless otherwise indicated.

MayCaesar

bluesky said:

Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ``banned the use of race and ethnicity in university admissions, dealing a major blow to a decade- old practice that boosted educational opportunities for African Americans and other minorities.``(The Japan Times, July 1-2, 2023)

This means that affirmative action policies are no longer allowed. 
I believe that this unfair decision by top U.S. court may trigger anger, a sense of discrimination toward society 
among younger generation coming to the U.S. from many parts of the world. 

I am a little confused by your reasoning here. While I personally disagree with such an intrusion of government in private affairs, I also do not see how banning explicitly discriminatory policies may "trigger anger, a sense of discrimination toward society". If anything, it is the presence of those policies that would induce such a response.

I also have never heard of someone coming to the US because of affirmative action policies here. Anecdotally, when I was coming here back in 2014, America still maintained the image of that promise land where anyone, regardless of their background, can succeed through hard effort. Affirmative action policies, if anything, undermined that image, and more often than not policies like this would cause people overseas to not come to the US in favor of what they perceived a more meritocracy respecting country such as Switzerland or Singapore.

John_C_87

@just_sayin\
My apologizes, I have a hard time understanding what you are saying.  You mentioned GNP.  I think you are referring to GDP.  

You are right, sorry, I believe I am showing my age in calling out an expression like GNP. lol, however.....

In hindsight economically we would call something "sold" to the people a "domestic product” in this case though we can take liberty to call civil lawsuits a "national product" as they are often assigned connection directly attached to the states and federal process of regulation by a united condition set in writing as "appropriate legislation" by what is now repetition in American Constitution, the process of the courts overall appeal system. Understand? I must fight myself not to overthink writing anything down at once in haste as an appeal process can take decades and can end at any time abruptly. This affects many people at one time as some lawsuits are class action that address hundreds, thousands and even millions. Not all of them were created and tied to physical harm by negligence. The focus here is on the hidden connections kept and made directly to American National debt.  

Transparency?

Again, keep in mind though the republic of America is democratic, there are no exclusive democrat's as America's as part of a larger truth, there is only republicans. Like with plea bargain an innocence of a person may become lost, something right sacrificed to time and money. A vote in some ways can also be subject to loss in denouncing the people’s legal condition with the American republican just as state can lose value in separations to United States of law guided by Constitution..

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Yes, just about everything has been used to further racism.

@just_sayin

I think this was the medium article you were referring to, you linked to Forbes twice.

https://medium.com/the-enclave-of-others/the-racist-history-of-minimum-wage-5dd71ebf0770

Just because the minimum wage was used to promote racism in the past doesn't mean it is today. Christian churches have a long history of racism and chattel slavery. Should we abandon Christianity altogether because of Christianity's racist history?

Bogan

Rather incredibly, the world’s greatest democracy, the USA, is in real danger of becoming a Democrat controlled police state.      All of the pre conditions of becoming a police state are now present within the Democrat leaning, unelected US administration.     A seriously corrupt President and his son being protected by the very institutions who’s job it is to investigate and prosecute such corruption.   Senior administration illegal interference in elections, as well as the illegal political censorship of opposing opinions through sweetheart deals with major media companies.     The persecution and prosecution of a popular political opponent.

 The only hope that the USA now has, is the re election of Donald Trump to the Presidency of the USA.     Trump is now an experienced President who now knows who the real villains are.     When he gets back into power, he will see that the hopelessly corrupt senior administration officials who think that they are the government, and can do whatever they like, will be brought to justice.

 It is interesting to speculate just how much senior, Democrat administrators must be sweating, right now?      FBI Director Christopher Wray is an intelligent man, and he knows that what he did was completely and utterly wrong.     He knows that he is looking at a jail sentence, and a long one too.    Same with Merrick Garland.    He knew what he was doing was a complete violation of the very oath of office he once took.    But power corrupts, and the sort of power Garland wields, probably made him think he was beyond the law which he administered.   

  Same for the IRS bigwigs who tried to intimidate Elon Musk’s lawyer friend, then tried to quash the investigation into Hunter Biden’s tax dodging on his corrupt income, and then persecuted the whistleblowers who came forward to the Congressional Judiciary Committee.    Last comes that prize villain, Dr Fauci.      This guy went behind the backs of an elected government to fund what turned out to be a Chinese Communist bio weapons lab in Wuhan, which developed covid-19, resulting in millions of deaths around the world.    Crucifixion would be too good for Fauci.      I think he should burned at the stake. 

just_sayin

@Dreamer
Thanks for providing the correct link for me.  Glad we agree that the minimum wage has a racist origin story in the US.  I am wondering why you support a policy that most studies show negatively impacts those making minimum wage by reducing their hours, benefits, and jobs.  

The Harvard Business Journal reports that a study of California's minimum wage hike from 2015 to 2018 had the following impacts:

For every $1 increase in the minimum wage, we found that the total number of workers scheduled to work each week increased by 27.7%, while the average number of hours each worker worked per week decrease by 20.8%. For an average store in California, these changes translated into four extra workers per week and five fewer hours per worker per week — which meant that the total wage compensation of an average minimum wage worker in a California store actually fell by 13.6%. 

The CBO claimed that a $15 minimum wage would disproportionately benefit those not making the minimum wage.  Its the trickle up effect.  People making slightly above the minimum wage would see benefits from it as their salaries would also be raised, but again, the very people a minimum wage is touted to help would bear the brunt of lost benefits, lost work hours, and lost jobs.  I'm sure those who don't get fired, lose their benefits or work hours find a minimum wage benefit a good deal.  However, the net effect seems to be negative for actual minimum wage earners according to most studies.

John_C_87

As snug as a buf in a rug. That is what democracy in America is. What we are talking about here is Democracies fight for independence to be unregulsated in America. 

John_C_87

@just_sayin

In a nut shell the object, or goal set by raising the minumum wage is to add enough people to a copmpany work force to ensure employee healthcare not to ensure a overall livable wages. 

John_C_87

@ Bogan
The only hope that the USA now has, is the re election of Donald Trump to the Presidency of the USA

Former Oval office Executive officer #45 will never be President of the United States of America by his own action. His and the voters claim of Presidency of elected officials to political office in the Federal Government is based on Article II of the United States Constitution which in fact made his run for office part of a crime. As he was not a Presdient going into the election just a man with a goal of overtaking a women in a populatity contest. By his own words describing his campaign as a Presidential one was illegal, not just for him perosnally but all those who would have voted for him. This is the danger of the machine which is the continual seearch for the more perfect sttate of the union. Why I address United States Constitutional issues from outside the political arena is due to the legal entrapment the many fomrs of malpractice of law has created and to do any less is not fare to all thsoe in the system. Oval Executive officer #45 as a man in the best words possible is simply a poorly self-regulated regulated human and though elected to office displays openly no abilities to be a President of the United States of America. The issues harming America are located within the United States Constitution and a majority of the conflict is created over clear and truthful statements that are missing from the document.

The best example is Article II as we all know it is the desire of America to see a female be addressed as a independent American Constitutional entity, Presadera, easy enough. Article II Section 1, Clause 8 has some minor issues of fact as it states "he" not He / She while in truth does not also say President / Presadera. Much of Article II shares many of the same issues but in truth, whole truth and nothing but truth should address the voters powers as limited to assignment of Oval Executive officer as the oath of office to President / Presadera is conditional upon displayed abilities show in connection to United States preservation, protection, and servitude.

On a personal note it is the servitude of the United States Consitution which so many people have a issue with for it is associated with being a slave completely subject to the powers therein.

Bogan

@John_C_87

Hi John C 87.     I read your (as usual) garbled and rambling submission directed at me and could not understand a word of it.    Please take your pills.

John_C_87

@Bogan

Wasn't directed at you, it was directed at principles of United States Constitution you cannot grasp.   

Thank you for admiting that point.

John_C_87

@Bogan
Well at least on the bright side you can understand it is my submission and not the total lack of originality one can hope submissions to be when staged.

Barnardot

@Bogan ;The only hope that the USA now has, is the re election of Donald Trump to the Presidency of the USA. 

The problem with the red necks is that they are so radical that they get the idea that because Trump is on the right that it means that he is a red neck like them or that the red necks can push him further to the right. But trump is not like that. Sure he bends over to get the vote of those dummies but he is a descent guy and he isn't going to roar a round in a mat black Ram pickup with the lights on the roof and shoot up every thing in site while hes drinking beer and eating steak all the time. Hes going to run the government and if you ask me hes proberly going to shut those red necks up once he gets in because he knows that they cause to much trouble like last time when he lost the election. And by they way its burned the steak not burned the s-t-a-k-e.

John_C_87

I took your name out of the direction of this post. I’m really not trying to nag you and it is clear you simply may not have any clue as to what is taking place in America. The fact is coaching witnesses works and there have been case studies to prove this.

You are looking at this way to personal. Are disagreements being only in the way Article II is written inappropriately. You do not understand your own United States Constitutional Rights, United States is describing connections of many states of the union with all people, as in "We the People of the United States of American." This is literally in writing as entered fact and truth describes as American Constitution preamble. Every American who has read the first several lines of the United States Constitution has read this part.

First there is a conflict of interest between the Oath of office of President of United State and the way the Article and Section treat the process of election describing President with only the word "He" within Article II. My grievance, my point is that the word "He" is to remain within Article II and the word "She" is to be added and this would be a Amendment adabtation that would be appropriate to Untied States Consitutional Preservation. As long as the word President in Article II all sections with exseption to Oath of office contain the wording of Oval Office Exsecutive officer. We are after all are to be describing fact and truth before the people this to form the more perfect state the descussion can go as far as to say we are to describe truth, whole truth, and nothing but truth.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Your welcome for finding the correct link.

@just_sayin

"Walmart and McDonald’s are among the top employers of beneficiaries of federal aid programs like Medicaid and food stamps" Hannah Miao

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart-and-mcdonalds-among-top-employers-of-medicaid-and-food-stamp-beneficiaries.html

I am a big fan of we have to do something. Another way to phrase is that there are observational and experimental scientific studies. We can guess all we want in theory, but randomized controlled trials cut through the conjecture.

 Even if an hypothesis is falsified, taking action provides additional evidence and data. We learn from both our failures and successes, meaning doing nothing is often the worst possible choice.

Raising minimum wage and employers reducing hours gives employees more time to study, train, or job seek for a more profitable job. In the end poverty is detrimental to individuals and society. Ideally, there would be no poverty and welfare would only be needed for people who got incredibly unlucky, literally struck by lighting and became disabled for example. Do you agree we should strive to end poverty?

John_C_87

@Dreamer

I am a big fan of we have to do something. Another way to phrase is that there are observational and experimental scientific studies. We can guess all we want in theory, but randomized controlled trials cut through the conjecture. Even if an hypothesis is falsified, taking action provides additional evidence and data. We learn from both our failures and successes, meaning doing nothing is often the worst possible choice.

The point however is the cost of expanding economic growth doubles and triples during the data searches..

jack

Argument Topic: I believe U.S. faces the crisis of equal right for education in the U.S. today.

@bluesky

Hello b:

Here's the answer..  It's simple, really.  Open up all the schools to teach anything and everything to anybody who wants to learn it. 

If you believe, as I do, the nation benefits when the populace is educated, investing in the people is a GOOD thing..  It's GOOD for the people, and it's GOOD for us..

If you DON'T believe that, show me the ways the country benefits when the population is ignorant.

excon

just_sayin

@Dreamer

I am a big fan of we have to do something. Another way to phrase is that there are observational and experimental scientific studies. We can guess all we want in theory, but randomized controlled trials cut through the conjecture.
 Even if an hypothesis is falsified, taking action provides additional evidence and data. We learn from both our failures and successes, meaning doing nothing is often the worst possible choice.
Raising minimum wage and employers reducing hours gives employees more time to study, train, or job seek for a more profitable job. In the end poverty is detrimental to individuals and society. Ideally, there would be no poverty and welfare would only be needed for people who got incredibly unlucky, literally struck by lighting and became disabled for example. Do you agree we should strive to end poverty?

I am working on proprietary AI software that will restate a person's words to help give them greater clarity.  Let's see what it ways when we input your comments:

Proprietary AI translation of Dreamer's words:
"I don't really care if my ideas make things worse for poor people.  As long as I can virtue signal and tell people I care I'm OK.  Poor people should be happy that policies I support will cut their hours and take home pay.  It will give them a lot more free time, in which they won't be making money to pay their rent.  I know the policy I support won't end poverty, but only make it harder for poor people, but I am more concerned what people think well of me than actually making things better."

Yikes!!!  I must have had it set for brutal honesty.  Sorry about that.  Sometimes, it can be very jarring to hear what we are saying in such blunt words.  (Because you may not get my sense of humor let me tell you I'm joking ... a little).

I would rather do nothing, than enact a policy I know will hurt poor people.  I am at a loss for why people would continue supporting a minimum wage if they are aware of the negative consequences to teens, the lowest skilled workers and ex-cons.  

I think an important question to ask, is "do minimum wage jobs, below the $15 minimum wage, serve any important purpose?"  Now, resist the socialist tendencies to kick in and say "it only serves the greed of employers", to consider how it helps the worker.  Let me point out some ways for you:  It provides rungs on the tree to the ladder of success that if taken away make it harder for ex-cons, teens and those with low skills to get a job at all.  Why give an ex-con a $15 an hour job when you can give someone who doesn't have a prison record that same job and avoid the risk?  The answer is there is no reason.  Why give a teen a job, that someone with experience is willing to take?  The answer again is there is no reason.

Most people in minimum wage jobs, are either not looking for a full time job or have it to supplement their income (See the BLS report on characteristics of minimum wage workers.).  Most people use these minimum wage jobs as stepping stones to get experience or just pick up some extra cash.  One of the results of the Seattle minimum wage study was that it found that some people were "unemployable" in the new higher wage minimum wage reality.  There was no motivation to higher people with low skills, teens, or ex-cons anymore.  There was no advantage for employers to give them a chance.  The workers couldn't negotiate a lower wage to show the employer they will be a good worker.  Others found that employers cut their benefits and work hours to compensate for the mandate.   

A reality that higher minimum wage advocates pretend doesn't exist is that if you increase someone's expenses without increasing their revenue, that just to "break even" with where they were the prior year, they have to cut expenses somewhere else - like benefits, number of hours, or number of staff.  

Barnardot

@jack @Bogan If you DON'T believe that, show me the ways the country benefits when the population is ignorant.

Well thats all good but in realty if we dont teach every thing that doesn't mean that kids are going to be ignorant period. They might be ignorant about a lot of things but thats not bad any way. For example you could teach kids how to make an atomic bomb and thats not a good thing in my mind. And then your going to get teachers like Bogan who are going to teach kids everything thing that he knows which is not much any way. And what he does know is all totally negative racialist and bully boy stuff. So then that all the kids that graduate from his classes are going to loose there jobs all the time and leave one woman after another and drive a mat black Ram with the lights on top and shooting up every thing that moves and crush there empty beer cans with one hand and think they know every thing there is to know about life.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Teach anything? Do you really mean that?

@jack

Teach anything as in conspiracy theories and science denial. Creationism, Big Tobacco misinformation, climate change denial, sCAM (complementary and alternative medicine), quackery, how to commit the perfect murder, etc. I doubt that is what you mean, can you clarify please?

Dreamer

Argument Topic: That is a valid point about ex-cons.

@just_sayin

My original argument was about how playing musical chairs with demographics can pit disenfranchised groups against each other. I think I failed to mention formerly incarcerated people. Thank you.

Also that we need to continue to hammer on economic inequality, poverty, and ending exploitation. Maybe raising the minimum wage to $15 is incorrect, I am not committed to this path to reducing poverty.

" This is a topic where things can get heated, but it's also a really important and nuanced debate."

https://www.npr.org/2021/01/29/962124776/should-we-raise-the-minimum-wage

Ultimately, I don't have the time to invest at the moment for a really nuanced minimum wage debate. Therefore, I will retreat on this front.

"death rates were four and a half times higher in the poorest counties than those with the highest median incomes."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/04/us-covid-devastating-toll-poor-low-income-communities

Poverty kills. Other ways to end poverty might be a maximum wage, universal health care, free college but less student loans, affordable housing, getting people vaccinated, personally I think really targeting Big Tobacco might have enormous beneficial economic impacts.

"Cigarette and smokeless tobacco companies spend billions of dollars each year to market their products."

https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/tobacco_industry/marketing/index.htm

This is just immoral for a company that provides no social good to society and ultimately steals tax dollars in the form of medicare and medicaid.

jack

Dreamer said:

@jack

Teach anything as in conspiracy theories and science denial. Creationism, Big Tobacco misinformation, climate change denial, sCAM (complementary and alternative medicine), quackery, how to commit the perfect murder, etc. I doubt that is what you mean, can you clarify please?

Hello Dr:

Yeah, it was what I meant..  I simply don't believe that information, by itself, is bad.  It's what people DO with the information that matters..  The best argument against a lie, is the truth. 

excon

Bogan

@Dreamer ;  Do you agree we should strive to end poverty?

That is like saying that you should strive to end crime or human hostility.    A nice little dream by a person who thinks that every problem has a solution, and the best solution is to keep throwing public money at the problem.    When that does not work, just throw more money at the problem.   When that goes not work.....add Infinitum.       Bureaucrats think that way.    Are you a government bureaucrat?       

The best way to reduce poverty is to recognise that poverty is primarily a factor of low intelligence.     Du-mb people, unless they win a lottery, are usually at the bottom of society and they stay there.     Even ones who win the lottery often blow the money on doing stu-pid things and spending it in stu-pid ways.   Smart people who may through circumstance find themselves at the bottom of society, work hard to get out of their circumstance and they become upwardly mobile.    The du-mb ones are too lazy.    They spend their money on gambling, cigarettes, alcohol, and illegal drugs.   They tend to be violent, and violent people end up in jail.   They die early because they eat to much fatty food and they won't work or exercise.    They think that their government has a endless supply of money which it should just give to them.    They have poor impulse control and often engage in stu-pid, risk taking behaviour or commit crimes of opportunity, both of which usually gets them into trouble with the law.    They elect corrupt and incompetent officials who promise to give them more government money.     They blame everyone else for their own stu-pidity, get angry about that. and burn down their own neighborhoods, and loot their own stores.     Then wonder why nobody will build shops or factories anywhere near where they reside.       

Any society which refuses to acknowledge this simple truth, refuses to stop the increase in stu-pid people, either through immigration or birth rate differentials, is doomed to fail.    I think that western civilisation is doomed to fail, because like so many failed civilisations before us, we refuse to acknowledge that which is destroying us.    Too many people have a vested interest in not acknowledging the truth.    Too many people think that all a government needs to do to solve a problem is to throw money at the problem.    The USA is now $34 trillion dollars in debt, and that dept just keeps getting bigger.  And bigger.         Extrapolate forward if you are smart.  If you are not smart, and just a Dreamer, then don't worry about it.   Money either grows on trees or falls from the sky as manna.     

just_sayin

@Dreamer

Poverty kills. Other ways to end poverty might be a maximum wage, universal health care, free college but less student loans, affordable housing, getting people vaccinated, personally I think really targeting Big Tobacco might have enormous beneficial economic impacts.

You made me cringe again.  There is a lot of cringy-ness in that paragraph.

Maximum wage?  So you think limiting someone's potential earnings will reduce poverty?  How will limiting the reward for one's time and work result in less poverty?  This is socialism, pure and evil.  Respect people's work and time.  Who are we to determine the upper limits of its worth?  If someone is willing to pay a wage greater than we like for someone's time and work, why should we interfere in that voluntary transaction.  Don't be envious of their success.  In Cuba they have an expression "The government pretends to pay us, and we pretend to work."  If you want to stop innovation and medical breakthroughs then limit the reward people can obtain.  No one will give their best if the reward is restricted.  

Do you own an iPhone?  Its very expensive and a lot of people can't afford them.  Did you feel robbed when you bought it or did you say "Thank you" to the store clerk who sold it to you at the end?  Did we hand over our money to a multi-billionaire company because we wanted the product they offered or because we were forced by a government gun to do so?  (I don't own an Apple phone so this is just a rhetorical question for you).   Apple got rich making products that people voluntarily paid for and people were glad to pay for them.  No one was robbed.  Why should Apple be restricted in how much money it should make?  It employs tens of thousands of people in high income making jobs.  It makes a product you are using willingly.  

Universal Health Care - a government run industry with the efficiency of the DMV and the compassion of the IRS.  Wow!  Canada has universal health care.  So tell me why do you think 60 percent of Canadians have PRIVATE HEALTHCARE INSURANCE PLANS?  Do you think it is because they think that Canadian healthcare is wonderful and will meet their every medical need?  Go ahead and answer the question.

According to Wikipedia: "In the U.S., the average wait time for a first-time appointment is 24 days (≈3 times faster than in Canada); wait times for Emergency Room (ER) services averaged 24 minutes (more than 4x faster than in Canada); wait times for specialists averaged between 3–6.4 weeks (over 6x faster than in Canada)."

Do you have brain damage?  Well, you might be able to see a doctor in 19.4 weeks depending on which province you are in.  In the US the average wait time for a new patient to see a neurologist is 35 days.  

And if you think "universal" health care means equal care then read the data from the link I provided above.  There are huge disparities between the more rural and urban provinces of Canada in care.  

Free College?  Studies show that people who go to college will earn 1 million dollars more in their lifetime than those who don't.  Tell me, who gets the benefit of that 1 million dollars?  Will you take that money away and give it to people who didn't go to college, but had to pay the debts of those who did?  No?  So, people who didn't go to college and didn't rack up hundred thousand dollar debts have to pay for the decisions of those who went to college, but they don't get the extra money that that college people make?  How is that just?  

affordable housing - Why do you think housing is unaffordable.  California has some of the highest average house costs in the nation.  Why is that?  Is it because there isn't enough land?  No.  Only 8.6 percent of the land is developed in California.  There are many laws prohibiting using undeveloped land for housing. 

So why then?  Its because of liberalism.  Take the average state's building code book and compare it to California's. California has over 1000 more pages than the average state does in building codes.  More codes means it costs more, and it also means that there are less housing because the same codes restrict the height of buildings, type of buildings, location of homes, etc.  These codes limit the land accessible for housing - like in San Francisco which limits residential buildings to 5 stories. 

Proposition 13 limits how much property tax can be levied on houses.  Sounds great, right?  Since the amount of taxes is limited on houses, the state and local government has little incentive to build houses and instead prefers stores and businesses.  The California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, requires that local agencies consider the environmental impact of a new housing development before approving it.  CEQA appeals delay a project by an average of two and a half years.  More time, means more money added to the cost of a home.

If you want affordable housing - don't vote for Democrats.  

This is getting long, so I'll stop for now.

Bogan

@just_sayin ;    This is getting long, so I'll stop for now.

No you wern't.   it was interesting, and I got the impression that you were just getting warmed up.    Sock it to 'em, just-sain.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: But I am talking about misinformation and disinformation in lieu of information.

@jack

" I simply don't believe that information, by itself, is bad." Jack

There is a world of difference between information and misinformation for me. Don't you agree that disinformation is harmful to society?

Dreamer

Argument Topic: You seem to be pro economic inequality.

@just_sayin

"It’s hardly groundbreaking to point out that economic inequality undermines democracy—Plato and Aristotle sounded the alarm more than 2,000 years ago, and the Founding Fathers followed suit." Astra Taylor

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2019/how-to-fix-politics-in-america/inequality/create-a-maximum-wage/

Your argument seems to promote an oligarchy a major just world fallacy. How about all the people who got rich off of economic rent, quack tycoons, casinos, big booze, big tobacco, and even though I am fan of vaccines big pharma? 

Has the smartphone really made the world a better place? All those small screens lead to eye strain. Isn't big tech responsible for a lot of harm? A lot of people think social media makes everything worse. It certainty acts a 24/7 superspreader of misinformation, thanks Ebon Musk.

Technically, buying cigarettes is voluntary, but that doesn't mean it is moral when combined with addiction and disinformation. Big tobacco made cigarettes as addictive as possible.

"The tobacco companies worked to make them as addictive as possible."

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/big-tobacco-finally-tells-truth-court-ordered-ad-campaign-n823136

Bogan

@Dreamer ;  Big tobacco made cigarettes as addictive as possible.

Yes, they did.       Not only that, they knew that their product was killing off their own customers, so it was imperative to go after the kids.    Tobacco marketing executives knew that most smokers began smoking as adolescents, so they pitched their products specifically to children.    They did this by using a modern advertising technique based upon human psychology.     They knew that many children could not wait to grow up and have the freedoms of young adults.    For these vulnerable kids, cigarette smoking was a way of showing how grown up they were.     The cigarette manufacturers did not have to say that their product showed how grown up their young customers were, all they had to do was show images of manly cowboys, or young adults having endless fun while smoking cigarettes, and the desire of these vulnerable kids to display how grown up they were did the rest.

Young lefties like yourself are conditioned to leftism using the same methods.    Lefty leaders know that so many young lefties want to display to the world how unique, intelligent, and morally superior they are.    So, they pitch their ideology as the sort of causes that, unique, intelligent, and morally superior young people would advocate for.     Works a treat.     It does not matter that historically, socialist totalitarianism failed in every country that was ever cursed with it.    If you pitch it to naïve kids that left wing socialism has all the answers, and that only unique, intelligent, and morally superior young people can understand that, then young people will accept it with alacrity.    This is how they sell such absurd ideas that a man can be a woman, just by putting on a dress, and saying that he is a woman.    

Cigarette manufacturers also got around bans on cigarette advertising by having "incidental" smoking scenes in movies involving young and influential movie stars.    The use of brand named products in movies to advertise products is called "product placement" and it is even more successful as an advertising tool than straight out advertising.       Most Hollywood movies are chock a block full of product placement advertising as it is a perfect way to link their products to on screen role model heroes.  They know that the fans of role model heroes will do anything to link their own image to their on screen heroes.    Such as buying a product linked to that hero.    Political activists quickly realised that movies were also a perfect way to push their socialist woke agenda.    Unfortunately for them, their writers got a little too eager to push the left wing woke party line, with the result that Hollywood movies are so filled with leftist woke dogma that they have become unwatchable.

I just thought that you might be interested in learning how you got brain washed, Dreamer?

John_C_87

@Dreamer

There is a world of difference between information and misinformation for me. Don't you agree that disinformation is harmful to society?

I disagree there is little of difference between information and misinformation.

 I believe U.S. faces the crisis of equal right for education in the U.S. today.
By the time we enter grade school education is no longer about learning it is job training. A concern is how do we become in direct competition with each other for the same jobs during the educational experience.

John_C_87

@Bogan
Not only that, they knew that their product was killing off their own customers, so it was imperative to go after the kids.

"Knowing they had been killing off their own customers", legislators ordered the placement of known chemical carcinogens in Tabacco, bed mattresses, box springs and coverings, couches, rugs, and baby cloths all to stop them from burning as quickly? Did legislation pass unconstitutional laws to directed and conceal whole truth? The idea was to stop fires in housing and apartments but came at a price. 

Flame Retardants (nih.gov)

People enjoyed smoking even after it had been poisoned and the unconstitutional use of taxes had been deployed on them, Something historically predictable since probation and alcohol poisoning and the use of paraquat on marijuana.