FIVE Reasons why FREE Community College is a Terrible Idea

[Jludo]

Off your meds?

You of course recognize the error of extrapolating the results of that study to the broader population.

I'm all for those who elect to drop out to homeschool and become burdenless on society. It would be particularly useful if they stop whining about the state of the world and just move along. Set yourself up in a valley next to Howard Roark.

If Colorado weren't awful on guns I'd always wanted to move out to galts gulch.

 

[Alpo]

Besides, education was left to local or the State. Once again, not within the purview of the Federal Government.
Just because it's not the Federal Governments job, does not mean that it can't get done.

I dont' think we disagree there. I don't believe we need a Dept of Education at the Federal level. At least not one that does more than serve as a watchdog over state abuses.

I reiterate that the St of California has had a very successful community college and state university system for many years. It was and continues to be funded by property taxes.

 

[Alpo]

Sooooo very much non sequitur....

I can't believe you are discriminating against homeschooling fathers. Nevermind those that work and homeschool. What of the gays, where there is no one around to be pregnant? Will no one think of the homeschooling gays?

Parachuting into the thread with a bayonet, Fargo?

Extrapolating home school success rates into the broader population takes child-bearing females largely out of the work force. It would only take a generation or two before the literacy rate of the broader population declines significantly....which might not be bad since a greater manual labor force will be required with the breakdown of our economic system.

 

[BugI02]

I believe employing tutors still constitutes homeschooling, since rigor and curriculum control are prime movers not who actually does the teaching. So Mom isn't necessarily barefoot and in the kitchen. Hows the other ankle?

 

[actaeon277]

I dont' think we disagree there. I don't believe we need a Dept of Education at the Federal level. At least not one that does more than serve as a watchdog over state abuses.

I reiterate that the St of California has had a very successful community college and state university system for many years. It was and continues to be funded by property taxes.

Then we agree on something.
If a State wishes to do that, then that would be in their purview.
Citizens would be free to move to another State, while still keeping their rights.
If a State has a problem with people leaving, then they'll have to decide what to do.

To make it nationwide... then people can't move to avoid it, unless it's out of country.

 

[Alpo]

I believe employing tutors still constitutes homeschooling, since rigor and curriculum control are prime movers not who actually does the teaching. So Mom isn't necessarily barefoot and in the kitchen. Hows the other ankle?

My ankles seem to be fine. Why are you always reaching for yours?

 

[jamil]

Anyone actually read the proposal? What it requires? That occupational/skilled trades are included in the proposal?

You can still be against it, but maybe read what it actually is before you decide.

Obama's name is the only one in the article, unless I missed something.

Is it the government's job to take money from you to pay for high school? Middle school? Elementary school? Or is public education of any kind verboten?

I have read Bernie's proposal and I've read the article. But I wouldn't have needed to read either to discover that I disagree with Bernie's proposals on ideological grounds. And I am well justified in making it an issue of ideology.

In his rhetoric in favor of his plan, Bernie doesn't really make the sort of practical argument for it that you imply that there is. His justification is absolutely ideological. He uses the words "it is immoral" in a facile dismissal of the practical arguments against. If he gets to say disagreeing with him is "immoral", then I get to say disagreeing with me is immoral. His justification is every bit as much an ideological cause as my ideological cause against it. That means I don't need to know the details to know that I don't want to pay for teaching tomorrow's leaders that that white people are evil, capitalism is evil, individualism is evil, personal responsibility is evil, that people need safe spaces, that "free" speech is only speech that agrees with progressive ideals, etcetera, etcetera.

Aside from the issue of making me pay for things I disagree with, this whole topic is just another chapter of the discussion of collective rights vs individual rights. I will concede that there is a collective benefit to an educated society. But making it a collective right isn't the only way to achieve an educated society. NPR, in a decently written fact-check of Bernie's rhetoric, notes that most of the nations that have a "public right" to a college education aren't more educated than nations where colleges charge tuition.

By saying it's a collective right, we're really saying that the public has a right to the labor of others. So then, the logical implication of that is that society must be compelled to pay for it. There IS a cost for that. It's fair to ask, at what point does the cost exceed the benefit? Since the precedent for the a public school system has long been established, so we now engage each other over where the limits should be.

So let's talk about the reality of where we are now. We've long since established that there IS a collective right to education. The line is currently drawn for the most part at K-12. So where SHOULD we draw the line? Since that's the real discussion, I'll say that I prefer we place the limits be well south of where they are now. I'd much prefer a private solution where individuals may choose. If we have an single payer system, then education becomes even more institutionalized than it is now. Institutionalized learning means you learn what the government wants you to learn, rather than a market based educational system that reacts to what individuals want to learn most.

We seem to be able to fund wars without much of a problem....and then leave behind billions in equipment (and in the case of southeast Asia, billions in hard cash). How many kids could go from pre-school to doctorates on that waste?

I'd rather see the Johnson County schools get the dollars associated with surplus MRAPs than give the sheriff a new toy. Maybe that's just me.....

We fund drug intediction and prison systems.

I'm sure you could get by with home schooling. After all, rugged individualists acting by themselves in their own self interest built the morass we live in today.

Oh look. Someone failed government/econ class. Can't tell the difference between limited government and anarchy.
And drill for water? How quaint. I did drill. Not everyone has city water and septic.

Well, he did say he went through the [STRIKE]free education system[/STRIKE] indoctrination camps in Kalifornia.

 

[Fargo]

Parachuting into the thread with a bayonet, Fargo?

Extrapolating home school success rates into the broader population takes child-bearing females largely out of the work force. It would only take a generation or two before the literacy rate of the broader population declines significantly....which might not be bad since a greater manual labor force will be required with the breakdown of our economic system.

Look man, you are slinging insults around here like Bernie Sanders is paying for them. None of the positions others have taken here even imply, much less necessitate, that anyone is mysoginistic/anti education/mentally ill/etc.

My post was to point out that based upon the logical leaps you have been making here with these insults, one could impute discrimination against homosexuals to you. If you don't like that, maybe consider backing off how quick you are to ascribe evil motives and intent to others?

 

[Alpo]

You helicoptered in to a thread and don't really deserve a response.


As to insults? I think they are fall within "INGO rude" remarks, which are typical of a number of right-wing pseudo conservative members here. I wouldn't call Bug's comments "insults". Perhaps to an unitiated user, but I've got a thicker hide than that.

bye

 

[Alpo]

I have read Bernie's proposal and I've read the article. But I wouldn't have needed to read either to discover that I disagree with Bernie's proposals on ideological grounds. And I am well justified in making it an issue of ideology.

In his rhetoric in favor of his plan, Bernie doesn't really make the sort of practical argument for it that you imply that there is. His justification is absolutely ideological. He uses the words "it is immoral" in a facile dismissal of the practical arguments against. If he gets to say disagreeing with him is "immoral", then I get to say disagreeing with me is immoral. His justification is every bit as much an ideological cause as my ideological cause against it. That means I don't need to know the details to know that I don't want to pay for teaching tomorrow's leaders that that white people are evil, capitalism is evil, individualism is evil, personal responsibility is evil, that people need safe spaces, that "free" speech is only speech that agrees with progressive ideals, etcetera, etcetera.

Aside from the issue of making me pay for things I disagree with, this whole topic is just another chapter of the discussion of collective rights vs individual rights. I will concede that there is a collective benefit to an educated society. But making it a collective right isn't the only way to achieve an educated society. NPR, in a decently written fact-check of Bernie's rhetoric, notes that most of the nations that have a "public right" to a college education aren't more educated than nations where colleges charge tuition.

By saying it's a collective right, we're really saying that the public has a right to the labor of others. So then, the logical implication of that is that society must be compelled to pay for it. There IS a cost for that. It's fair to ask, at what point does the cost exceed the benefit? Since the precedent for the a public school system has long been established, so we now engage each other over where the limits should be.

So let's talk about the reality of where we are now. We've long since established that there IS a collective right to education. The line is currently drawn for the most part at K-12. So where SHOULD we draw the line? Since that's the real discussion, I'll say that I prefer we place the limits be well south of where they are now. I'd much prefer a private solution where individuals may choose. If we have an single payer system, then education becomes even more institutionalized than it is now. Institutionalized learning means you learn what the government wants you to learn, rather than a market based educational system that reacts to what individuals want to learn most.





Well, he did say he went through the [STRIKE]free education system[/STRIKE] indoctrination camps in Kalifornia.

I'm for education vs bullets into Afghanistan and Iraqi hillsides.

Talk about immoral.....

Just because you have a point of view doesn't give your thoughts intrinsic value. You could be wrong from many standpoints: economic, philosophic, scientific, etc.

As to the California system, it seems to have worked pretty well for those of us who went into high-tech. Silicon Valley is largely the result of the education system resident there, not because San Francisco is "pretty".

 

[Hohn]

Obama's name is the only one in the article, unless I missed something.

Is it the government's job to take money from you to pay for high school? Middle school? Elementary school? Or is public education of any kind verboten?

I pay thousands of dollars a year in property taxes, a major fraction of which goes to public schools my children do not attend. (We homeschool) There are no vouchers or other subsidies to defray this cost to me that I have taken out of the public education system.

Yet lower income people can get subsidies to let their kids attend PRIVATE SCHOOLS that I my kids cannot get any subsidy for.

Does THIS seem right to you?

 

[Hohn]

We seem to be able to fund wars without much of a problem....and then leave behind billions in equipment (and in the case of southeast Asia, billions in hard cash). How many kids could go from pre-school to doctorates on that waste?

I'd rather see the Johnson County schools get the dollars associated with surplus MRAPs than give the sheriff a new toy. Maybe that's just me.....

We fund drug intediction and prison systems.

I'm sure you could get by with home schooling. After all, rugged individualists acting by themselves in their own self interest built the morass we live in today.

Unlike much public education, military training often produces actual SKILL that allows someone to get a real job after military service. I saw it firsthand. I'd push a flight of basic trainees through to graduation day and they were the heroes of the family and neighborhood because they had a ticket out-- they had hope. Those were two things that public education didn't deliver to them.

And guess what? THEY EARNED IT. They worked their butt off doing things that the others back in the neighborhood would not do.


The best "investment" we could make in public education is a massive reduction in funding. The data actually this, as the per-pupil spending is negatively correlated with student achievement (even after adjusting for inflation).

Why? Because all the extra money that is SUPPOSED to go the classroom instead feeds the education bureacracy. It buys programs and program administrators. It buys gadgets like iPads and crap that students don't need. It goes to cushy and very costly retirement benefits for well-connected teachers unions.

And yet somehow, that's all "for the kids."

I tell you what-- when Illinois can't fund its schools because they are completely broke trying to fund the cushy teacher retirements that are written into the state constitution as untouchable, then tell me how the kids have benefited from the political nest-lining of those unions.

 

[Hohn]

Or how about the part where the defense budget is only 10 percent of federal spending.
Eliminate the entire military, and we're still deficit spending.

It's actually more like 25%. About a trillion a year on a $4T budget.

 

[Destro]

I pay thousands of dollars a year in property taxes, a major fraction of which goes to public schools my children do not attend. (We homeschool) There are no vouchers or other subsidies to defray this cost to me that I have taken out of the public education system.

Yet lower income people can get subsidies to let their kids attend PRIVATE SCHOOLS that I my kids cannot get any subsidy for.

Does THIS seem right to you?

Well the General Assembly is compeled under the constitution to operate a public school system...as far as the private school issue, so what? I dont qualify, so I shopped around and found a rual public school 20 minutes away that i believe is better than any private school in my area anyway. I pay nothing but gas.

 

[Fargo]

You helicoptered in to a thread and don't really deserve a response.


As to insults? I think they are fall within "INGO rude" remarks, which are typical of a number of right-wing pseudo conservative members here. I wouldn't call Bug's comments "insults". Perhaps to an unitiated user, but I've got a thicker hide than that.

bye

If you are under the misapprehension that I care about your responses, much less feel entitled to them, please disabuse yourself of the notion.

 

[Bill of Rights]

You helicoptered in to a thread and don't really deserve a response.


As to insults? I think they are fall within "INGO rude" remarks, which are typical of a number of right-wing pseudo conservative members here. I wouldn't call Bug's comments "insults". Perhaps to an unitiated user, but I've got a thicker hide than that.

bye

I guess you'll say I'm "helicoptering" in, too, but I didn't see him calling BugI's comments insults, he said yours were.

I tend to agree, and was reading the whole thread to make sure I wasn't jumping to conclusions.

My read on it is that you are issuing both insults and trolls, trying to bait responses.

Example: Misogynist? I didn't see where anyone suggested that only women could teach, nor that they should be "barefoot and pregnant", though in fairness, I didn't read links. (one cool thing about homeschooling is that it doesn't have to happen between 0730 and 1530, M-F... meaning that parents can teach any time they have available.)

My suggestion:

I really don't want to have to get my helicopter.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Twangbanger]

...I reiterate that the St of California has had a very successful community college and state university system for many years. It was and continues to be funded by property taxes.

It isn't just "property taxes" going into that state budget pot. Successful Cal State grads still living out there are paying State income tax rates in excess of 10% in some cases - but their alma mater still has to turn away more and more applicants each year.

It seems there really is no free lunch. (And the Democrats are the ones running it).

 

[Hohn]

Well the General Assembly is compeled under the constitution to operate a public school system...as far as the private school issue, so what? I dont qualify, so I shopped around and found a rual public school 20 minutes away that i believe is better than any private school in my area anyway. I pay nothing but gas.

You're missing the point. If I have taken my kids of out public school, that saves the district the however many thousands of dollars per kid they would spend educating my kids. It seems logical to me that if poor person can get a partial subsidy to a private school, then an actual net contributor in property taxes would be eligible for at least a partial subsidy of the home education.


Then again, you're talking to a guy that would voucherize the whole mess of public education and make every school a for-profit enterprise.

 

[Alpo]

***

 

[Alpo]

BOR: The thread is an indictment of the collegiate system and in particular free community college. I disagree. While I think "cultural studies" is largely a waste of time and money except for those who have an anthropologic bent, I do think that some of the other majors mentioned by Actaeon (professional nanny, pop culture, gunsmithing, fermentation sciences, Canadian studies, decision making, bakery science and management, costume technology, Entertainment Engineering & Design, and Turfgrass science) could provide measurable value to society at large. There are trades (and therefore economic impact) associated with them in the real world. In addition, electives are generally thought to be a good aspect of an education to "round out" the student. So, while art history might not be "useful" to a software coder, it might help make that person more social.

As to home schooling, I'm sure it can be successful in a microcosm. On a macro level, it is entirely disruptive to the economy. A parent is pulled out of their otherwise busy work cycle to provide instruction to each individual child, thereby lowering their economic impact. It also assumes that 30 parents home schooling is better than one teacher. I'd argue that observation as specious. In any group of 30, I doubt that all of them have the intellect, patience and discipline to educate their children. If you know better, please cite your sources. And to those commenters who cite the "exception" of male/gay home schooling to the general way things get done in our society, the task of child-rearing is still primarily a responsibility of the mother. Arguing exceptions ad infinitum isn't helpful.

Ultimately, it isn't difficult to see that the level of education of future generations would suffer, the economy would be disrupted by the refocus of adult time toward child-rearing, particularly the female parent, vectoring society once again toward a patriarchy.

So, if I sound trollish, it's because the idea (and commentary support) that the education system provided to all is a bad use of our resources is unsound for a variety of reasons.

Yes, we put a man on the moon, before a number of "soft" degrees were offered by colleges and universities. But, the guys who put those men on the moon had college degrees, not home schooling. Take any space program or CERN, etc. Degrees. You don't make the first resume cut without an education. It's been that way since I started working in the 70's.

And underneath the success of some very famous companies run by "dropouts" is an organization staffed mostly with engineers and scientists...with degrees. So I say again, I would rather fund the development of the next generation of artists, vinologists, chefs, engineers and mathemeticians than leave spent uranium projectiles littering southeast Asia.