[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] You haven't proven me wrong on anything. Public schools don't create wealth. The public education system is almost worthless for grade school. The entire system is bogged down by students with no interest in school and no business attending it, though they are forced to by law anyways. Arbitrary standards on what is to be taught (regardless of relevance/importance to the students) results in people memorizing what they need to pass a class and then forgetting it afterwards.
It has resulted in a society of people who memorize facts rather than learn/understand concepts, which is convenient because a populace that cannot conceptualize abstract ideas cannot have ethical principals, and when the populace of a democratic society has no principals they can be manipulated into doing anything. Education would be far more effective and meaningful if it was privatized and the traditional K-12 format was dropped.
Laihendi
Actually, the return on education investment is high, the highest return on investment is in the early years....... Further, if "privatization" were to occur it likely need to be in a similar fashion to charter schools, which studies have shown their students don't perform better or worse than those in public schools. What evidence suggests that a K-12 public education makes someone a valuable productive member of society? Many people do not go to college, which means they never build on what they learned in grade school, which means they do not retain much at all from the later years. Even those who do go to college often end up not needing a lot of what they learned in HS. For example I dropped out of my physics class in HS (I had to go through a lot of trouble with administration since this was an unusual thing to do) because I didn't see the point of learning it and I have not suffered at all from that decision in uni because it is not relevant to my field of study. If I had stuck with that class (like pretty much everyone else at my school) it would have ended up being a huge waste of my time and the taxpayers' money. Is this a serious question? Median Income for an Individual with less than a HS education is $18,794 and the median income of a HS graduate (or equivalency) is $26,699 (Data is from the US Census American Community Survey) A 40%+ increase in median income seems valuable to me.........
[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] You are misunderstanding what I am saying. Personal responsibility, productive work, and innovation are the only ways to truly address poverty. That does not mean that those things will just happen for everyone if the government stops regulating work, industries, wealth distribution, etc. You cannot show it to be false that the government does not produce anything, because that cannot be shown to be false. The government does not create wealth. The government can only take and redistribute.Laihendi
I'm not misunderstanding what you're saying. You phrased your earlier post poorly or you changed your argument when confronted with facts that proved you wrong. You claimed that poverty can only be solved through lack of government regulation. Meanwhile countries with government regulation and welfare programs have the least poverty and highest standards of living. The government does actually create wealth. Look at public schools for example. Government. Education is shown to be the most effective way of creating wealth, reducing violence and crime. The amount put toward education is pretty low considering what it gets out. Do you understand the concept of investing? Oh who am I kidding. You should look it up. You haven't proven me wrong on anything. Public schools don't create wealth. The public education system is almost worthless for grade school. The entire system is bogged down by students with no interest in school and no business attending it, though they are forced to by law anyways. Arbitrary standards on what is to be taught (regardless of relevance/importance to the students) results in people memorizing what they need to pass a class and then forgetting it afterwards.
It has resulted in a society of people who memorize facts rather than learn/understand concepts, which is convenient because a populace that cannot conceptualize abstract ideas cannot have ethical principals, and when the populace of a democratic society has no principals they can be manipulated into doing anything. Education would be far more effective and meaningful if it was privatized and the traditional K-12 format was dropped.
Actually, the return on education investment is high, the highest return on investment is in the early years....... Further, if "privatization" were to occur it likely need to be in a similar fashion to charter schools, which studies have shown their students don't perform better or worse than those in public schools.
Both sides using survivors as emotional pawns in the game. How delightful. It just prevents lawmakers from making common sense laws that don't restrict freedoms, but do provide some control and prevention of those who shouldn't get guns to get guns.
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Not if government spending and corporate taxes were lowered. We haven't made the stuff they make over there for a long time now.
We should target a high tech economy. And having a higher purchasing power relative to the world won't hurt us at all in that area. It would allow our standard of living to remain while potentially dropping elsewhere as well.
I don't see anything good from matching the devaluation going on. It's not like we export much anyways. And what we do (commodities, planes, high tech, etc.) have little competition anyways.
KC_Hokie
Planes aren't competitive? Boeing vs Airbus.......Compared to must industries....not even close. That's one company away from a monopoly. And how are relatively more expensive Boeing planes not going to effect US exports?
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Why would it be worse if our purchasing power went up while simultaneously cutting government and government spending?KC_Hokie
If US currency can buy more goods in south-east Asia that will only exasperate the supposed problem (outsourcing)........Not if government spending and corporate taxes were lowered. We haven't made the stuff they make over there for a long time now.
We should target a high tech economy. And having a higher purchasing power relative to the world won't hurt us at all in that area. It would allow our standard of living to remain while potentially dropping elsewhere as well.
I don't see anything good from matching the devaluation going on. It's not like we export much anyways. And what we do (commodities, planes, high tech, etc.) have little competition anyways.
Planes aren't competitive? Boeing vs Airbus.......
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The status quo for fixing the economy isn't going to work. KC_Hokie
And making it worse isn't a better course of action..........Why would it be worse if our purchasing power went up while simultaneously cutting government and government spending? If US currency can buy more goods in south-east Asia that will only enchance the supposed problem (outsourcing)........
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Yea. Just like I said every reserve currency in the world is attempting the same thing in terms of currency devaluing. So nothing will get solved by copying that devaluing. KC_Hokie
And by doing so they are increasing their exports relative to no action. So it "is" working........The status quo for fixing the economy isn't going to work. And making it worse isn't a better course of action..........
Log in to comment