Educating African-American Children.

Don't feed the troll? Does anyone actually believe Legion would leave if no one responded?
 
wolfspinne said:
EDUCATING AFRICAN-AMERICAN children will not change anything.
When educators speak of improving the educational opportunities for Black kids ,they mean teaching the basic fundamentals of learning ;dealing with speech ,basic English, reading skills and basic math skills . To the end that this will enable them to obtain employment and eschew the criminal lifestyle they would otherwise be prone in adopting.

Whereas this may seem good ,the truth is that society has radically changed and in any event would realistically preclude Blacks from the job market ,other than in unskilled jobs that would not require any academic skills or learning.

SO WHAT'S THE POINT OF SPENDING BILLIONS TO TEACH THEM THE ABC.S??
Click to expand...

Okay, just as a side note here, this posting is absolutely rife with grammatical and structural errors. I am not an English major, but I bet I can find at least a half dozen mistakes, and I know people who could probably write an essay on how many rules of grammar were broken here. For all of your talk about the uselessness in educating blacks, it seems to have not done a whole lot of good for you either. Now, I figure you are going to blame your seemingly low level of education on blacks, who held you back in school or whatever, but I think we shouldn't be spending billions to educate anyone. We should be letting the free market handle education, and provide a quality product to the consumer, who force competition with their dollars, then we don't have to worry about paying billions for the education of others.
 
wolfspinne said:
oh my! and from someone living in the regrettable state of Alabama. Too much!
Click to expand...

Alabama is a regrettable state? Lets see, I don't know anyone in Alabama who thinks that "most blacks have mental issues", or that most blacks can't read, or that Eichmann was innocent. You have made claims to having done research, and your conclusions are laughable.

In fact, both posters here from Alabama are vastly more intelligent and far better educated than you are. So if you want to mock Bama, do so knowing you are below the standards in that great state.
 
Dixie said:
Okay, just as a side note here, this posting is absolutely rife with grammatical and structural errors. I am not an English major, but I bet I can find at least a half dozen mistakes, and I know people who could probably write an essay on how many rules of grammar were broken here. For all of your talk about the uselessness in educating blacks, it seems to have not done a whole lot of good for you either. Now, I figure you are going to blame your seemingly low level of education on blacks, who held you back in school or whatever, but I think we shouldn't be spending billions to educate anyone. We should be letting the free market handle education, and provide a quality product to the consumer, who force competition with their dollars, then we don't have to worry about paying billions for the education of others.
Click to expand...

The free market is usually code for non-regulation by the federal gov't (no democratic voting process, no following the Constitutional mandate for the "general welfare" of the public).......which leaves out charter schools. For profit organizations are just that....for profit. So they won't have to worry about educate everyone's kids...just the kids that they WANT to educate and who meet the standards. It'll be great for those that can get in and who's parents can afford it. Very elitist....very dangerous...because for those that would not meet the criteria for competing free market schools, you create a permanent class of low educated worker bees.
 
Taichiliberal said:
The free market is usually code for non-regulation by the federal gov't (no democratic voting process, no following the Constitutional mandate for the "general welfare" of the public).......which leaves out charter schools. For profit organizations are just that....for profit. So they won't have to worry about educate everyone's kids...just the kids that they WANT to educate and who meet the standards. It'll be great for those that can get in and who's parents can afford it. Very elitist....very dangerous...because for those that would not meet the criteria for competing free market schools, you create a permanent class of low educated worker bees.
Click to expand...

Totally marxist statement dude.

Bush II, the neocon felt the same way.

That's why we have, "no child left behind".

You're such a neocon!

Just like Bush.
 
Damocles said:
Wolfspinne has told me that you are bought off by the Jews. I've heard that only Christians have to fear them though, as there was no answer as to what Buddhists should do to show their great fear of Jews.

(Was I able to keep a straight face?)
Click to expand...

Well, please don't go and light yourself on fire. We prefer to have you around. :clink:

:burn:
 
Taichiliberal said:
The free market is usually code for non-regulation by the federal gov't (no democratic voting process, no following the Constitutional mandate for the "general welfare" of the public).......which leaves out charter schools. For profit organizations are just that....for profit. So they won't have to worry about educate everyone's kids...just the kids that they WANT to educate and who meet the standards. It'll be great for those that can get in and who's parents can afford it. Very elitist....very dangerous...because for those that would not meet the criteria for competing free market schools, you create a permanent class of low educated worker bees.
Click to expand...

"Free market" is a code word for getting the Federal government the fuck outta the way, and allowing private enterprise to work as it always does, better than anything the government could ever do. The entire understanding you and other liberals have of the "general welfare" clause, is misguided and ignorant of what the Founding Fathers articulated in the Federalist papers, and what they intended "general welfare" to pertain to. As for the actual education process, I think we need to put the onus back on the parents and students, and stop trying to find a way to excuse laziness and underachievement... that's probably the BEST thing we could do for ALL our kids, to ensure a good education. Yep... if you are a dumbass who doesn't want to do the work, you have no business using the air in the same classroom as my kids, because they are busting their asses.

Here's how the private system education would work... School A advertises their average GPA is 3.2, because of their special attention and unique teaching methods... School B, not wanting to miss out on the bucks, works hard to raise their GPA to 3.5 average... then they run a commercial to illustrate how much better they are than School A.... School C comes along, and utilizes an Asian teaching method, which produces students with an average 3.8 GPA... and they advertise this and upstage the other two. School A comes back the next year, and they have added new classes the others don't offer.... School B offers certifications for things the other two don't... and School C is still lauding their excellence in GPA. The thing is, WE (the consumer) can pick which school fits our needs the best. And while my example uses GPA as the selling point, perhaps there would be a School D... they specialize in bringing your dumb ass kid who can't cut it in the other schools, up to par... so they can get a minimal education at least. The wonderful thing about capitalism and the free market... if there is a need, it will be filled.
 
Liberty said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
The free market is usually code for non-regulation by the federal gov't (no democratic voting process, no following the Constitutional mandate for the "general welfare" of the public).......which leaves out charter schools. For profit organizations are just that....for profit. So they won't have to worry about educate everyone's kids...just the kids that they WANT to educate and who meet the standards. It'll be great for those that can get in and who's parents can afford it. Very elitist....very dangerous...because for those that would not meet the criteria for competing free market schools, you create a permanent class of low educated worker bees.
Click to expand...


Totally marxist statement dude.

How is standing up for the public education system that has served America well for over a century "marxist"? Do you realize that our public education system was and is responsible for the creation and maintaining of the middle class? Really Liberty, how ignorant are you?
Bush II, the neocon felt the same way.

You're saying that the Shrub was a marxist....because that's what YOU just accused me of being via my statement.

That's why we have, "no child left behind".
You Liberty lunkhead! The Shrub's NCLB was/is a complete failure, doing the opposite of what is allowed by the Constitution.....here, get educated:

http://www.gregpalast.com/no-childs-behind-left-2/

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1397606/the_apparent_failure_of_no_child_left.html

You're such a neocon!

Again, our Liberty lunkhead is just being a petulant child, making absurd accusations that he cannot logicly or factually support.
Just like Bush.
Click to expand...

Given the Shrub's documented history of reaganomics on steriods and his executive branch centric governing style, the liberty Lunkhead is either drunk, stupid or one of those assholes who thinks trying to irritate everyone is somehow a "victory".
 
Dixie said:
"Free market" is a code word for getting the Federal government the fuck outta the way, and allowing private enterprise to work as it always does, better than anything the government could ever do.

Repeating your Dixie dumb opinion in another form doesn't make you right, nor does it change the accuracy of my previous statements
The entire understanding you and other liberals have of the "general welfare" clause, is misguided and ignorant of what the Founding Fathers articulated in the Federalist papers, and what they intended "general welfare" to pertain to. As for the actual education process, I think we need to put the onus back on the parents and students, and stop trying to find a way to excuse laziness and underachievement... that's probably the BEST thing we could do for ALL our kids, to ensure a good education. Yep... if you are a dumbass who doesn't want to do the work, you have no business using the air in the same classroom as my kids, because they are busting their asses.

Dropping the "federalist papers" does NOT automatically make all the half baked drivel you spew justified, my Dixie Dunce. The problem with neocons like yourself, my Dixie Dunce, is that your reading comprehension is myopic at best. Madison pointed out that the “general welfare” refers ONLY to the powers given to Congress. Well, last time I checked, the Congress has the power to regulate commerce, (Article 1, Section 8) and when you couple that with Amendment 14, and the FACT that education is primarily under individual States rights (who may or may not use federal funding), education is a gov’t thing. Oh, and maybe you missed this little federalist tidbit by Noah Webster on education: It is an object of vast magnitude that systems of education should be adopted and pursued which may not only diffuse a knowledge of the sciences but may implant in the minds of the American youth the principles of virtue and of liberty and inspire them with just and liberal ideas of government and with an inviolable attachment to their own country

Here's how the private system education would work... School A advertises their average GPA is 3.2, because of their special attention and unique teaching methods... School B, not wanting to miss out on the bucks, works hard to raise their GPA to 3.5 average... then they run a commercial to illustrate how much better they are than School A.... School C comes along, and utilizes an Asian teaching method, which produces students with an average 3.8 GPA... and they advertise this and upstage the other two. School A comes back the next year, and they have added new classes the others don't offer.... School B offers certifications for things the other two don't... and School C is still lauding their excellence in GPA. The thing is, WE (the consumer) can pick which school fits our needs the best. And while my example uses GPA as the selling point, perhaps there would be a School D... they specialize in bringing your dumb ass kid who can't cut it in the other schools, up to par... so they can get a minimal education at least. The wonderful thing about capitalism and the free market... if there is a need, it will be filled.
Click to expand...

Once again, the Dixie Dunce shuns dealing with reality while opting to treating his supposition and conjecture as viable facts and logic. The REALITY is that "free market" does NOT guarantee any across the boards standard of quality. Idiots like Dixie sell their souls to the company store with the belief that a re-inventing of the checks and balances of the federal gov't by the corporate model will save the day. Well, someone needs to clue in the Dixie Dunce that a mild version of his educational wet dream....charter schools...don't pan out that way. Charter schools have a failure rate that's on par with the disasters within the public school system. Also, charter schools have a nasty habit of dumping students that are either problem kids and/or slow learners and such onto the local public school. Again, the "free market" won't have to worry about educate everyone's kids...just the kids that they WANT to educate and who meet the standards. It'll be great for those that can get in and who's parents can afford it. Very elitist....very dangerous...because for those that would not meet the criteria for competing free market schools, you create a permanent class of low educated worker bees. Dixie doesn't explain how people are going to afford the competitive tuition for these schools of his....will his "free market" recreate a loan/tuition system? Scholarship? Will there be contracts that keep students at company A's schools from kindergarten through college? And if Wall St. fucks up and School A's shareholders bail, where does that leave the students?

People like the Dixie Dunce love to worship at the altar of "free market"....and like most religious zealots, the Dixie Dunce just don't think things through, they just "believe".
 
Well, at least I know you actually did read what I posted. That's gratification enough for me, I never expected you would agree with it.

Dixie doesn't explain how people are going to afford the competitive tuition for these schools of his....will his "free market" recreate a loan/tuition system?
Click to expand...

Easy.. Where the Federal government now provides federal funding to schools, they would send vouchers to individuals with school-age children. You could then decide where you want to spend your voucher. By cutting out the "middle man" (the school board) we would save billions, maybe trillions... and it would necessarily improve the quality of education through competition.

Standards? We have academic standards now, don't we? Why would things have to be any different? Of course, we won't have liberal mush-brains in Washington trying to brainwash our kids into accepting homosexual marriage... we would need to ensure the standards were in accordance with the academic requirements of college and university acceptance levels, but that shouldn't be hard to establish at all... remember, the competition is going to take care of a lot of this stuff. People won't pay for shitty education.....well, unless it's forced on them by their government and they have no other choice, like it is now!
 
Dixie said:
Well, at least I know you actually did read what I posted. That's gratification enough for me, I never expected you would agree with it.



Easy.. Where the Federal government now provides federal funding to schools, they would send vouchers to individuals with school-age children. You could then decide where you want to spend your voucher. By cutting out the "middle man" (the school board) we would save billions, maybe trillions... and it would necessarily improve the quality of education through competition.

Standards? We have academic standards now, don't we? Why would things have to be any different? Of course, we won't have liberal mush-brains in Washington trying to brainwash our kids into accepting homosexual marriage... we would need to ensure the standards were in accordance with the academic requirements of college and university acceptance levels, but that shouldn't be hard to establish at all... remember, the competition is going to take care of a lot of this stuff. People won't pay for shitty education.....well, unless it's forced on them by their government and they have no other choice, like it is now!
Click to expand...

If schools had to compete i.e. be academically excellent to get your dollars, they will.
 
Ice Dancer said:
If schools had to compete i.e. be academically excellent to get your dollars, they will.
Click to expand...

Exactly, or other schools would put them out of business. American consumers are demanding, and this would be no different when it comes to education of their children. Schools would have to start getting results, because that is what they would be judged on, and where the money comes from... as it stands now, they have no motivation to do anything except count butts in seats and look to the government to send them 'welfare' checks. Every day, we hear about teachers sexually molesting children, or attempting to brainwash children, or promoting a political agenda with our children, and demanding more and more of OUR money for the privilege. Schools have become glorified day care centers, and inner-city schools have become like prisons where the prisoners rule. There is just nothing about the current system which helps promote better education, and there is not a "fix" for this problem, because the system itself is dysfunctional and flawed.
 
Dixie said:
Exactly, or other schools would put them out of business. American consumers are demanding, and this would be no different when it comes to education of their children. Schools would have to start getting results, because that is what they would be judged on, and where the money comes from... as it stands now, they have no motivation to do anything except count butts in seats and look to the government to send them 'welfare' checks. Every day, we hear about teachers sexually molesting children, or attempting to brainwash children, or promoting a political agenda with our children, and demanding more and more of OUR money for the privilege. Schools have become glorified day care centers, and inner-city schools have become like prisons where the prisoners rule. There is just nothing about the current system which helps promote better education, and there is not a "fix" for this problem, because the system itself is dysfunctional and flawed.
Click to expand...

Don't blame the teachers, blame the politicians and, since they represent the people, blame the people and of course, you being one of the people, blame yourself.
One thing that most non Americans agree on is the talent Americans have for finger pointing; a talent you develop at your mothers' knees. (Those of you with mothers, that is.)
The UK didn't have the 'kids have rights too' nonsense until way after your 'progressives' thought it up, and I think we realised it was wrong a little ahead of you.
But whatever. You let it happen. As did I in the UK. We just didn't shout loud enough.
No child left behind? What absolute shite! Dont tell me this was a democrat idea, it may well have been, but it is not excused by that. You are part of the system that not only allowed it but actively supported it.
There is a cure. It is this:
1. Cut school sizes to a managable 600 or 700.
2. Cut class sizes to 13-15. and stream them.
3. Separate the sexes.
4. Insist on uniforms.
5. get rid of site police.
6. Train passionate teachers not kindly wusses.
7. Ban gum.

Dont have the money? Stop being the world's police. Policing is expensive.
 
Dixie said:
Well, at least I know you actually did read what I posted. That's gratification enough for me, I never expected you would agree with it. I ALWAYS read what is offered to me by EVERYONE, and try to be thorough....which is why I'm able to explain specifically why you're wrong on certain points and assertions. Trouble is, YOU seldom if ever read information I source, which results in the rehashing of points already addressed. Also, I note that you avoid my response your statements regarding public education, the Constitution, "federalist papers", general welfare.

Dixie doesn't explain how people are going to afford the competitive tuition for these schools of his....will his "free market" recreate a loan/tuition system?
Click to expand...

Easy.. Where the Federal government now provides federal funding to schools, they would send vouchers to individuals with school-age children. You could then decide where you want to spend your voucher. By cutting out the "middle man" (the school board) we would save billions, maybe trillions... and it would necessarily improve the quality of education through competition.

Newsflash for you...."voucher" programs already exists, and don't live up to their PR and hype. Observe:
School Vouchers Flunk Again: Milwaukee Study Shows ‘Choice’ Scheme Doesn’t Work
http://blog.au.org/2008/02/27/schoo...waukee-study-shows-choice-scheme-doesnt-work/


Last year, a Congressionally mandated review of the program by Department of Education researchers concluded that there were no significant differences between the test scores of students who received a voucher and those who applied but, not receiving one, attended public schools instead.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/28/education/28voucher.html?ref=education

Standards? We have academic standards now, don't we? Why would things have to be any different? Remember, you're REMOVING the public education mandate that offers education to ALL children. What indications do you have that "free market" schools will maintain that? Remember, you already have "charter" schools that dump off their less desirable students on public schools....why should a private, free market school take in kids that might lower a performance curve that would damage their competitive edge? Of course, we won't have liberal mush-brains in Washington trying to brainwash our kids into accepting homosexual marriage... Last time I checked, the vast majority of public schools throughout the USA are doing what you assert here. Of course, if you had ALL the parents to get off their butts and get active in the PTA and local gov't meetings, they would determine what policies and formats get on the curriculum. "Free market" may not offer the choices in your neighborhood that you desire based on demographics, which determine marketability and competitivness...so your belief that the "free market" would automatically give you what you desire is false we would need to ensure the standards were in accordance with the academic requirements of college and university acceptance levels, but that shouldn't be hard to establish at all... remember, the competition is going to take care of a lot of this stuff. People won't pay for shitty education.....well, unless it's forced on them by their government and they have no other choice, like it is now!
Click to expand...

See previous reponses here.
 
Last edited:
Schools do not exist simply to make honest ,literate citizens out of citizens ,but to inspire genius . And this is why it is a tragic mistake ,and a costly one, to educate african-american children. no geniuses there.
 
wolfspinne said:
Schools do not exist simply to make honest ,literate citizens out of citizens ,but to inspire genius . And this is why it is a tragic mistake ,and a costly one, to educate african-american children. no geniuses there.
Click to expand...

So how many black members of Mensa would make you admit you are full of shit here too?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top