Political/News/Debate Thread

[Lordata]

*Gasp* Robert Reich summed it up pretty well. *Gasp* The republican approach is fucking insane right now. *Gasp* They are devouring themselves over an issue that is so unpopular it will get them all kicked out of office.

Another thing. On the education issue, which is raging right now, some food for thought:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-americas-schools/2011/05/09/AFunW27G_story.html

Gip, i'm sure you see this on the regular scenario on the regular- A buddy of mine is a high school teacher in SE Massachusetts. He's been at the gig for about 4 years. He teaches at a school that has charter school status but has become the "alternative school" for kids who are about to be kicked out of one of the cities other high schools.

Anyhow, he says that his students rarely show up to class, let alone complete their work, and that input from parents is nearly non existent. He would send letters home to parents, without a return address so that the students couldn't hide them, warning of low grades and the like. One parent has responded. The students continue to do as they choose.

During his first two years teaching he graded students according to what they learned, attendance, and how they performed on his exams- the majority of his students failed and were graded accordingly. He was called into a meeting with the principal/headmaster and was told that a positive supervisory review and job security were dependent upon bumping the grades higher. This happened twice.

He now says that the only purpose of each day is to go in and try to get students to do work but more importantly to get them to like him because they know that he's got no power to suspend them or to encourage them to learn.

How common is this experience in public schools?

2) They act like Charter schools are the answer. Here's the thing: only 13% of charter schools perform above the public school average on standardized tests. That means that 87% are doing equally to or worse than traditional public schools. That can not be considered an answer by any standard. I don't have the citation, but I've seen it plenty of times.
The fact is, even if charter schools were "an answer" they would be "the answer" ever, because a lot of kids don't end up going to charters and will never end up going to charters. We need to work to fund and fix our public schools so they can provide the teachers and resources necessary to do the job. And for the record, I've worked at both fully public (LAUSD and OUSD) schools as well as charter schools in both systems, and currently work for a charter. For the record, the reason I bounced around a lot was because at first I wasn't credentialed, but have done long term sub gigs that definitely qualify as teaching, including one from September-June in Oakland. Now I'm credentialed and chilling where I'm at, unless I can figure out a job up in The Bay again.

Charters have basically been used by the religious right in my home state to bring religious teaching back into schools. They're taking away from teachers who work at public schools who probably aren't that bad and just costing everyone more money overall. They're fucking stupid.

[weedpop]

*Gasp* Robert Reich summed it up pretty well. *Gasp* The republican approach is fucking insane right now. *Gasp* They are devouring themselves over an issue that is so unpopular it will get them all kicked out of office.

Another thing. On the education issue, which is raging right now, some food for thought:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-americas-schools/2011/05/09/AFunW27G_story.html

Gip, i'm sure you see this on the regular scenario on the regular- A buddy of mine is a high school teacher in SE Massachusetts. He's been at the gig for about 4 years. He teaches at a school that has charter school status but has become the "alternative school" for kids who are about to be kicked out of one of the cities other high schools.

Anyhow, he says that his students rarely show up to class, let alone complete their work, and that input from parents is nearly non existent. He would send letters home to parents, without a return address so that the students couldn't hide them, warning of low grades and the like. One parent has responded. The students continue to do as they choose.

During his first two years teaching he graded students according to what they learned, attendance, and how they performed on his exams- the majority of his students failed and were graded accordingly. He was called into a meeting with the principal/headmaster and was told that a positive supervisory review and job security were dependent upon bumping the grades higher. This happened twice.

He now says that the only purpose of each day is to go in and try to get students to do work but more importantly to get them to like him because they know that he's got no power to suspend them or to encourage them to learn.

How common is this experience in public schools?

The problem I have with the article is that they act like because of these issues, innercity kids can't learn. While they may not have some of the assets other kids have, that doesn't mean they can't learn, it just means it takes a teacher with the skills and understanding, and a school with the resources necessary to compensate for what is missing, and who can also bring out the assets kids often do have, but are ignored by traditional and "one size fits all" education.
Waiting for superman is kinda bullshit though. They correctly point out problems in the school system, but seem to point to the wrong issues that are hurting them. I could go on a 10 page rant about what they are, but this reply is long enough as is. The big problems with that movie are:
1) They blame it all on unions, which thearticle I posted skims the surface of in terms of why that is flawed. My main argument is that I went to what is considered one of the best high schools in the country, and its unionized. Every top public high school is. There isn't even a correlation there, let alone causation. If you think unions are the one giant bureaucracy in urban public schools, you are missing 99% of the overgrown and unnecessary institutions bringing down these huge bureaucratic school districts. Also, At my charter school, they give us union pay + 10%. No unions = no good teachers at charters either.
2) They act like Charter schools are the answer. Here's the thing: only 13% of charter schools perform above the public school average on standardized tests. That means that 87% are doing equally to or worse than traditional public schools. That can not be considered an answer by any standard. I don't have the citation, but I've seen it plenty of times.
The fact is, even if charter schools were "an answer" they would be "the answer" ever, because a lot of kids don't end up going to charters and will never end up going to charters. We need to work to fund and fix our public schools so they can provide the teachers and resources necessary to do the job. And for the record, I've worked at both fully public (LAUSD and OUSD) schools as well as charter schools in both systems, and currently work for a charter. For the record, the reason I bounced around a lot was because at first I wasn't credentialed, but have done long term sub gigs that definitely qualify as teaching, including one from September-June in Oakland. Now I'm credentialed and chilling where I'm at, unless I can figure out a job up in The Bay again.

I don't think the article is saying that the kids can't learn, just that there are fundamental socio-economic problems which have to be addressed (and which exist completely separate from the schools themselves) before any significant improvement in learning outcomes can be attained. The tone is certainly a little more pessimistic than your post, which shows a really encouraging optimism that I'm sure has been tested again and again by the realities of administrative bureaucracy, parent-teacher and student-teacher relations etc.

I'm really bummed that the one full length documentary I've seen produced on the the American school system seems to be mostly based on reactionary anti-union sentiment. I really doubt that there are that many teachers out there who studied for years and sacrificed more lucrative opportunities only to get a job that they really don't give a fuck about, just for the benefits and vacation time. It's incredibly short sighted to blame unions for systemic problems that hinder members of the lower strata of society in getting a good education. This should be obvious to anyone that has researched which schools do well in America and which don't, and I'd have to assume that the filmmakers at least did that in the course of production. Did Scott Walker direct this movie or something?

[Ronald Wilson Reagan]

I hear you, and there definitely is truth to that. I guess my point is, those are factors, and often times do affect education. It is difficult to take so much inequality coming into the classroom, and have equal outcomes, especially with unequal resources. In high school I never was in a class more than 27 or so students, in LA the MINIMUM is 38:1. That means a teacher must have a minimum of 38 kids in each class, with the maximum being up in the 40's. There is a lot more obligation on the teacher. I guess my point is not that those aren't obstacles, but that at the same time they aren't completely and always insurmountable.

In terms of unions and charters, I think it is a more complicated issue than both sides give credit. I think unions are necessary for good teachers because even with unions the average teacher I'm guessing makes somewhere in the $40-50K range for an insane amount of work. Lawyers and doctors have very difficult jobs too, but there are more than enough of them, because the benefits attract quality professionals to the field. The less bargaining power to get good pay and benefits for teachers that exist, the less good teachers there will be in either type of school- as I mentioned before, most charters base teacher salary on union negotiated public contracts. I'm not saying all teachers do it for the money, but we do want to be fairly compensated for the commitment we put into our work. At the same time, the public school system has some huge flaws that do need to be addressed.
I heard a speaker recently named Pedro Noguera, who is considered to be a major authority on Urban schooling, and particularly the issues surrounding African American Males and the present school system, and he brought up an interesting point. He claimed that unions have somehow become defenders of the status quo, which we all know is not ok. They got so wrapped up in trying to save their position in schools, that somehow they have cornered themselves into saying essentially that there is nothing wrong with public schools- which is ridiculous. I've seen it in person. I have a classmate who works at Fremont High School in South LA. That school is fucked up beyond belief. It has the largest student body out of any high school in America, making it insanely overcrowded- for some reason this makes him proud. They also go on a year round schedule, which basically results in two 8 week breaks a year, and has shown to result in students 2-3 years behind their counterparts at other similar schools. Its a result of overcrowding, but he thinks its awesome that he gets breaks like that. Noguera's point was that they have allowed a system which is pretty overwhelmingly anti-union to somehow become the voice for reform. The charters at this point have become the one people turn to as an attempt to reform schools, even if the premise of them as a replacement for public schools is inherently flawed.
Noguera wasn't fully coming out in support of charters though, even though he did support certain specific ones. His point was that teachers unions were at a crossroads and faced some serious issues to resolve. His solution was that they needed to start spearheading genuine reforms to public schools and have a genuine agenda of their own, rather than just clinging to their current status and making as few concessions as possible. I think he's pretty right on.

Here's the big issue I think schools are facing now, even though it might be a little esoteric. Its all about testing. No Child Left Behind and state programs are all based on standardized multiple choice tests. The problem with this is that suddenly schools are now focusing on that type of learning as a goal. I think when we all think of schools, we want them to be places where children can learn and prepare to be successful adults in the real world. Learning a huge collection of facts over 13 years is not really doing that. Schools, particularly urban schools, need to focus on problem solving skills and critical thinking abilities that will allow students to become adults who are capable of facing complex problems and looking at complex issues that they will face in the real world. That's why a lot of other countries are doing better than the states. They do have national testing, but it will be much different. I've seen samples, and usually its some form of problem posing that requires students to use knowledge and apply it, rather than simply recall the facts. Schools need to help students reach their own social and political consciousness, help them become aware of the world around them, and inspire and motivate them to apply their knowledge to the world. The high stakes place of testing, and the seriously limitted amount of time teachers have to teach the standards makes it a lot harder for that important kind of learning to take place. A kid who spends all of his time in social studies class memorizing names and dates is hardly going to know how organize his community to build a political constituency or approach local problems, and if you are in a community with real problems and no constituency, that type of education is very important, because without it, the problems continue, and political power continues to flow further towards those who already yield it or have the money to manipulate it. Really, that fucks every level of society in the end. [/rant]

[Beer Keg Peg Leg]

That was a great post Gipper. I'd gnar you but i like -420 better than -419.

[NickDagger]

Workers share of national income plummets to record low

Over the last decade, the share of U.S. national income taken home by workers has plummeted to a record low.

Check out the chart below, compiled by the Labor Department, and posted this week by conservative writer David Frum. It shows that the decline began with the brief recession that followed 9/11 in 2001. But it continued even as the economy picked up again, and got even worse once the Great Recession hit. In the weak recovery since then, workers' share of income just kept on falling.



Why are workers taking home such a reduced share of the pie? Opinions differ, but many experts think that the trend has to do with a number of factors, including a decline in the bargaining power of labor, and increased competition from foreign workers. Similarly, over the last year or so, U.S. companies have made record profits, while unemployment has stayed high and wages have barely risen.

The chart jibes with other data, which show that since the 1980s, income for the richest 1 percent of Americans has exploded, while hardly budging at all for everyone else.

Still, there's little sense that either Obama administration or Congress plan to do much about this growing inequality. Indeed, any serious action to boost the economy and cut unemployment now seems to be off the table.

[Ronald Wilson Reagan]

Dagger, your articles depress the shit out of me. Just want to point something out- Highest drops in worker wages are consistent with eras when "Reaganomics" were used.
FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK REAGAN.

[daniel]

I did an undergrad in Urban Studies & had a Human Geography Professor who was fascinated with Brazil & South America in general.

That graph is indicative of a trend leading towards the same class disparities. The US as a third-world like economy is very scary.

[Mouth]

An old flatmate of mine is a teacher. When she tried to get some kids in her class to behave, they waited for her after school and beat the shit out off her a bus stop, breaking her arm and three ribs. Teaching ain't easy.

[William Jefferson Clinton]

Dagger, your articles depress the shit out of me. Just want to point something out- Highest drops in worker wages are consistent with eras when "Reaganomics" were used.
FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK REAGAN.

Reagan raised the debt from 89 billion dollars to 240 billion dollars.

[William Jefferson Clinton]

President Obam's  weakness is that he believes he can still reach agreement with closed-minded conservatives whose only goal is to remove him from office, even if it destroys the nation. He needs to recognize that the right is not his friend and to begin to govern from the left and fulfill his promises upon which he was elected. He needs to force through Wall Street financial reform (especially speculators), close Guantanamo, remove US troops from Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen and most of the rest of the world, revise US trade policy and revise the tax code so that those companies who benefit from being in America must create jobs here.

[NickDagger]

The Truth About the Economy

[NickDagger]

[sven thorkel]

Here's a good documentary. I don't expect anyone to watch it, but it's worth it. It's about how an Ayn Rand fanboy became the most important decision maker in America, and how he sold it to the Chinese.

All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace (Ep. 1) - Full

[Ronald Wilson Reagan]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/wpix-man-robs-bank-health-care,0,4161298.story

Its a fucked up time we are living in...

[NickDagger]

Death Of The Liberal Class, a gr8 book, summarized well here:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=131166027

[NickDagger]

http://tinyurl.com/3dt2369

Cost of US wars since 9/11? At least $3.7 trillion, study finds
224,000 people have died directly from warfare and 7.8 million people have been displaced

[dlx111]

^not bad considering that we did it for a just cause, oh wait nevermind.

all joking aside, this is what really makes me mad about our government and country. we think that its our job to seek revenge on a single man and or country and input our system into others ways of life. by looking at our country, what makes us think we can run another one or multiple ones. most of the "third world" countries, while there is hardship and generally bad things, seem to have a better outlook on life than modernized people.

im just sick of seeing innocent civilians sucked into our stupid plans and seeing their countries, along with their cultures, destroyed.



also reagan^^ i can attest to the schools not teaching thing. when i did go to public school and even private school, the ENTIRE emphasis is based on book knowledge and real world problems or realistic things are never even touched on. in the are in florida i live in there are soooo many uneducated kids who have no jobs and generally dont know squat about taxes, the law, finances and the lot, me included. i was never taught in school about the responsibilites of paying taxes or mortgages or even about finances, all of this is now my parents job to teach me or my own.

[grimcity]

Here's a good documentary. I don't expect anyone to watch it, but it's worth it. It's about how an Ayn Rand fanboy became the most important decision maker in America, and how he sold it to the Chinese.

All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace (Ep. 1) - Full

Stayed up too late watching this last night... super good. Anyone got any other movies in this vein, or politically related and interesting? Must sees?

[sven thorkel]

Here's a good documentary. I don't expect anyone to watch it, but it's worth it. It's about how an Ayn Rand fanboy became the most important decision maker in America, and how he sold it to the Chinese.

All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace (Ep. 1) - Full

Stayed up too late watching this last night... super good. Anyone got any other movies in this vein, or politically related and interesting? Must sees?

The Corporation. That one's classic, but it's a gooder. Also, the Micheal Moore ones are decent (I know I will probably be shit on for saying that, but whatever).

[dlx111]

^ i liked his, capitalism was great and sicko was good too.

[David]

From PBS: Commanding Heights      http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/hi/story/index.html

Adam Curtis' BBC documentaries, like the one posted earlier, are highly recommended. The Trap, Century of Self, and Power of Nightmares are all really good.

[kevbo999]

I saw a thread on some local forum that claims "The US is fucked, the government of Minnesota is shutting down due to lack of funds, and some southern counties have no police because of the same reason."

Anyone care to elaborate?

[Ronald Wilson Reagan]

That is a spin on the right wing hostage situation right now. There IS money, but Republicans want to lower taxes and cut services to their constituencies, so they are creating extreme situations and basically holding different states, and on a national level, the entire country, hostage until they get their way. Basically, the economy went south (as a result of the complete failure of a pure republican policy under Bush) and people lost jobs. This created a deficit, as payroll and income tax revenue, which is based on money people get for working, and property taxes, which relate to property value, all dropped through the floor. This has created deficits that states need to deal with. The thing is, in almost every situation, a slight, short term rise in taxes would help fix the deficit issue at the state level.

Warren Buffet is the second richest man in America, and considered the greatest investor alive. Here is his stance on the situation in D.C. with the debt ceiling:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/warren-buffett-debt-ceiling_n_892332.html

Note the following key points:
-Republicans are holding the nation hostage by refusing to raise the debt ceiling, which happened 8 times under Bush
Sidenote: only the house of Representatives, controlled by Republicans can raise the debt ceiling.
-Not raising the U.S. debt ceiling will make the U.S. go into default on debts, which will destroy the value of our money
-If the U.S. doesn't raise the debt ceiling, which they easily could do, we will immediately lose our high credit rating, which apparently is very important, within a day.
-Most economists claim this will create a financial crisis worse than housing collapse
-This is nowhere near the worst debt crisis we have had in the past century, as immediately after WWII U.S. debt was at 120% of GDP, and now its only at about 60%, but the Republicans are turning it into one by playing this game

My own sidenote- during the great depression in the U.S. we had two different presidents with two very different approaches to solving it. Hoover was the man who was president when everything went to shit. His solution was to balance the budget, this resulted in the depression growing worse in every way. This is the method the Right is saying must be used today, and that they are trying to push with the debt ceiling terrorism*. It has been historically proven to fail. FDR was the other president, he ran up the debt and the economy immediately started getting better, because he was investing in America. Today people like to pretend that didn't happen, or like times are different now, but they are wrong. Over the top stimulus and a short term spike in debt are really the only way we can get back to having a strong economy.

Edit: * I say terrorism because the GOP does not have the votes or representation in D.C. to honestly control the agenda. Instead they take the few things they do control and turn them into weapons, threatening the clvilian population until their demands are met. Its pure and simple terrorism. I say ship Boehner and the tea party to Gitmo.

[L33Tg33k]

I feel like we're all living in this cartoonish nightmare where stupid illogical shit is held up as God's truth and we're driving headlong into a fucking cliff.  Everyone see the cliff and knows inherently that if we drive off a cliff then we'll all surely die, but since the driver says if we go off the cliff we'll "...Finally get what we deserve".  The thing is, the driver's wearing a parachute and all the passengers know what it's for, but we go along with it any way because our apathy wins over our better judgement.  I don't know, maybe the driver's right.

Anybody else get this feeling?  I'm not that old so can someone else tell me has it always been like this?  Does this make any sense?

[Ronald Wilson Reagan]

I feel like we're all living in this cartoonish nightmare where stupid illogical shit is held up as God's truth and we're driving headlong into a fucking cliff.  Everyone see the cliff and knows inherently that if we drive off a cliff then we'll all surely die, but since the driver says if we go off the cliff we'll "...Finally get what we deserve".  The thing is, the driver's wearing a parachute and all the passengers know what it's for, but we go along with it any way because our apathy wins over our better judgement.  I don't know, maybe the driver's right.

Anybody else get this feeling?  I'm not that old so can someone else tell me has it always been like this?  Does this make any sense?

The stakes are higher now and the right is further to the right than they have ever been. It got kind of like this with the bickering bullshit when Clinton was president and there was a constant witch hunt out for him, but the right never threatened to destroy the U.S. economy as it has recently

[David]

Old news.

Obama to pull out 10,000 troops from Afghanistan by year's end

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/06/obama-announces-ustroop-withdrawals-from-afghanistan/1

"...he will pull 33,000 U.S. troops from Afghanistan by September of next year, calling it the beginning of the end of a nearly decade-long conflict that has cost 1,500 American lives and billions of dollars."

[dlx111]

i dont understand what its going to take for the republicans to stop acting like this is a game. your job is to help run a COUNTRY, eh hem, COUNTRY! they, and both sides do it, act like these situations are a game and do nothing but bicker with party politics and in the mean time the average person is sitting at home watching this unfold on the news in amazement at their sheer lack of maturity.

i really wish there would be some independent out there who would shun all the immature politics and just try to whats best for the country and the people.probably a unrealistic dream, but oh well.

[bakedRice]

Old news.

Obama to pull out 10,000 troops from Afghanistan by year's end

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/06/obama-announces-ustroop-withdrawals-from-afghanistan/1

"...he will pull 33,000 U.S. troops from Afghanistan by September of next year, calling it the beginning of the end of a nearly decade-long conflict that has cost 1,500 American lives and billions of dollars."

ya but i heard that whle troops are leaving, their sending in like just as many private contractors to fill the void for like another year or two, and private contractors are not held accountable for the shit they do over there... http://www.rferl.org/content/private_security_contractors_us_afghanistan_iraq/24260106.html

half of the mess there and the pr nightmare is because these hired guns do whatever the fuck they want and unlike a soldier, just simply get fired from work when they fuck up... i think its not yet time to herald obama for ending the war just yet...

and i fucking hate how politicians forget why they are there and what led them to be making decisions in the house... government is always run by people with ulterior and personal motives, but maybe if these people had hearts they should be shown the derelict conditions in a part of their consistuency, because then they would realize they should be working for the muthafuckin PEOPLE, whos money theyre using to do NOTHING. too often times people forget where things or even themselves come from...

[The Poster Formerly Known As Crass]

So what's going to happen with the budget? Doesn't seem like there's any movement on the issue.

[HawkbillKayak]

Don't get in to politics, only science.