What makes arguing with liberals so frustrating #1

[Bern80]

The fact is that Parochial schools do a better job of educating kids than do public schools in almost every category.

The fact is that secular private schools do a better job of educating kids than do most parochial schools and almost all public schools.

The fact is that homeschooled kids are getting a far superior education than all the other groups.

The fact is, when our elected leaders who are using the people's money to increase their own power, prestige, influence, and personal fortunes send THEIR kids to the same public schools they force on the rest of us, THEN I might believe they give a damn about whether the public schools are doing a good job of education. Until then, our liberal friends seem unable to see that the bureaucracy is swallowing up almost all of the money with very little going to actually educate kids.

We are already presumably spending more per capita on education than almost any other country and are getting some of the worst results. That suggests we should get the Federal government out of education altogether and return the system to the local communities and school boards that once provided our school kids with a world class education on a par with or that exceeded just about everybody else.

The most frustrating thing about discvussing this with liberals is that they will not see what is, but think if we just throw more money after the bad, that will fix the problem plus any of us who oppose putting more federal funding into bad education are accused of wanting to stop educating our kids.

It's all apples and oranges

Private schools get to select their apples while public schools, by law have to educate apples, oranges, bananas and rotten tomatoes.

And yet before the Federal government and teacher's unions inserted ithemselves into public education, we still had one of if not the very best education system in the world despite all those applies, oranges, and rotten tomatoes.

That should be a huge wake up call for everybody, most especially the left. I think most on the right are quite aware of that indisputable fact.

Despite what people like Konrad would like to think, this is where logic escapes liberals. It should be brutally obvious to anyone who looks at the dynamic of the teacher, student, union relationship to understand why more money is going in while results are going down.

How can I put this simply.....A teacher's union is a TEACHER'S union. It represents teachers. It does not represent students or parents. The purpose of a teacher's union is to make things better for it's members. And really that's the only way it can work. As much as teacher unions would like to say they're for the students, they're not. They really can't be. After all most people aren't going to pay dues to be a member of a group who's purpose is to serve someone else.

 

[Dr.Drock]

The US has thousands of independent school districts operating to different standards. Some school systems are well funded and offer fine educations. Other schools slash funding to a bare minimum and try to reduce education to Read'n, Rit'n and Rithmatic. These schools, in what we like to call Red States historically lag other schools in the nation in their quality of education

You really REALLY ought to do some reading before you post sometimes:

When it come to excellence in education, red states rule—at least according to a panel of experts assembled by Tina Brown’s Newsweek.

Using a set of indicators ranging from graduation rate to college admissions and SAT scores, the panel reviewed data from high schools all over the country to find the best public schools in the country.

The results make depressing reading for the teacher unions: The very best public high schools in the country are heavily concentrated in red states.

Read more: Republican States Have The Best Public Schools In The Country, By A Long Shot - Business Insider

Since we are talking Math and Science. Which States perform the best in Math and Science?

Massachusetts
Minnesota
New Jersey
New Hampshire
New York

And which perform the worst?

Mississippi
West Virginia
Louisiana
Alabama
New Mexico

State Education Rankings: The Best And Worst For Math And Science

I think overall scores are more important than scores in a particular field, despite those being important as well.

The sad thing is, it'll keep getting worse. But worry not rightwinger, both parties love the Department of Education no matter how terrible the results are.

 

[bripat9643]

Since we are talking Math and Science. Which States perform the best in Math and Science?

Massachusetts
Minnesota
New Jersey
New Hampshire
New York

And which perform the worst?

Mississippi
West Virginia
Louisiana
Alabama
New Mexico

State Education Rankings: The Best And Worst For Math And Science

It looks like you're implying that poor performance in math is the result of large populations of blacks and Hispanics. All the states that do well are Lilly white and all the states that do poorly have lots of blacks and/or Hispanics.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I see this over and over. Conservatives are for limited government. Just because we say we don't want government doing things where government is inept, counterproductive, wasteful or whatever, does not mean that we should shut it down totally.

Yes, we do need roads, bridges, highways, jails, schools, aircraft carriers, GPS satellites, standard weights and measures, courts, etc etc. Saying we don't need subsidies for crummy cars badly built and still with astronomical prices does not mean we don't need highways.

The conservative view is that the government should be a useful servant of the people's needs. However, you give it too much money, power, authority it becomes the worst sort of master.

Their inability to grasp the concept of logic is the most frustrating part of dealing with liberals.
All debates with them wind up with either the all or nothing straw man argument( i.e. you conservatives want NO regulations on business) or "you're an ( fill in blank with favorite insult)"

 

[Foxfyre]

The US has thousands of independent school districts operating to different standards. Some school systems are well funded and offer fine educations. Other schools slash funding to a bare minimum and try to reduce education to Read'n, Rit'n and Rithmatic. These schools, in what we like to call Red States historically lag other schools in the nation in their quality of education

You really REALLY ought to do some reading before you post sometimes:

When it come to excellence in education, red states rule—at least according to a panel of experts assembled by Tina Brown’s Newsweek.

Using a set of indicators ranging from graduation rate to college admissions and SAT scores, the panel reviewed data from high schools all over the country to find the best public schools in the country.

The results make depressing reading for the teacher unions: The very best public high schools in the country are heavily concentrated in red states.

Read more: Republican States Have The Best Public Schools In The Country, By A Long Shot - Business Insider

Since we are talking Math and Science. Which States perform the best in Math and Science?

Massachusetts
Minnesota
New Jersey
New Hampshire
New York

And which perform the worst?

Mississippi
West Virginia
Louisiana
Alabama
New Mexico

State Education Rankings: The Best And Worst For Math And Science

The states with the best record are also the states with the most private schools. Don't know whether they have the highest levels of home schooled. And the lowest ranked states you listed are also those with some of the highest per capita government spending and several are barely red if red at all.

You still can't get around the fact that red states are doing a much better job overall of educating kids.

And from the same article you linked:

The numbers below reveal that few states are performing at high levels, and most are poorly preparing students for science, technology and engineering.

According to a statement last week, Cottle said that although the SERI scores do not compare states to schools' performances in other countries, even the American leader -- Massachusetts -- would struggle to compete with countries like China or Singapore.

When you bleeding heart liberals actually demand results intead of trying to fit things into the parameters of ever bigger, more expensive, more intrusive government, you will see the wisdom of getting the Federal government out of public education altogether except for one small agency that would gather statistics and make them available as needed.

 

[BluePhantom]

You know I have thought about this for a very long time and engaged in some deep analysis of the thought processes of my friends, acquaintances, and professional colleagues who are liberals and the conclusion I have reached is the following (sorry for the length...it's necessary unfortunately):

Liberals tend to be very micro-focused people. That doesn't mean small minded (that's a different argument ), it means their point of view is such that little things bother them more than big things. They are very good at identifying individual elements of an issue and creating quick, simple solutions that will effectively address that individual point. However, their focus on the small means they have a very bad habit of missing the big picture and understanding that changing one thing will force other things to change in order to compensate is usually beyond their natural comprehension level. They really have to work hard to understand that.

As they are more idealistic and optimistic, they tend to focus on "how things should be" instead of "how things are". That's great when an issue can be addressed in a vacuum because it offers the chance for true development of culture and humanity. However, as things can very rarely be addressed in a vacuum, reality tends to get in their way in a very frustrating and persistent manner.

They are usually very offensive minded and quick to action and experts at short-term strategy. In a game of chess for example they are more likely to use 2-3 pieces on a frontal assault right out of the gates while ignoring the development of any real pawn structure for defense. If their initial attack is effective they win. If not they are a sitting duck once their offensive is beaten back.

So what happens with liberals is they see one thing that is out of balance or seems to them to be unfair and it galls the living shit out of them. As they are offensive minded, quick actors they immediately jump into addressing the problem. They quickly create and implement an effective solution. However, as the big picture is beyond them they step back to look at the result and realize that their actions have cause reaction somewhere else and now something else is out of whack. So in the end the result is that they run around in circles putting out fires of their own creation.

Now for the Republican mind it's really the exact opposite. We tend to be macro-focused. It's the big picture that concerns us more. We don't mind if a few little elements are a little out of whack so long as the overall balance is maintained. We excel at understanding how taking action to address A will force B to change to compensate and that will in turn mean C will change and D and on down the line. As such we are experts in long-term strategy and creating solutions to problems that address an issue in a such a way that the effect on other things is reduced. However, our focus on the large means we tend to miss the subtle nuances of specific situations and probably don't appreciate enough how out of balance an individual issue might be when placed side by side with a small number of similar issues. Our focus is on everything as a whole.

We tend to be defensive minded and strategic planners. In a game of chess we will meticulously set up an impenetrable defensive line with pawns and multiple pieces and force our opponent beat himself to death against the brick wall we have established. But that takes time to develop and that means we are slow to show attacking force. As such, if we have the time to get our defense set up we will win the game. If we are forced to attack before we're ready or our defense can be disrupted while we are still developing it, then we're in big trouble.

We tend to more realistic and pessimistic so when a liberal starts talking about "how things should be" we tend to say "sounds great but it's impossible to establish because all this other stuff will have to change as a result and it will create a cluster fuck in the grand scheme." Usually we're right but that also means that we have a habit of leaving things alone which really do require attention.

So for us, when something is out of whack, we look at the issue, examine it with a microscope, consider every little possible effect on every little possible action, develop far reaching, complicated strategies and implement them. Usually it works out better, but it takes us fucking forever to do it because we spend an eternity analyzing it. That means that development and advancement of culture and humanity comes slower with the macro-focused Republicans.

Take some time and watch the news. Listen closely to what Democrats say and what the Republicans argue. It's an interesting exercise to watch FOX News and MSNBC back to back and listen closely for the difference in micro-focus and macro-focus when it comes to policy ideas and strategy and what each party defines as a "problem".

Think of the Obamacare. Remember the Democrats saying "just pass it and we'll fix it later"? Well there you go. Micro-focused, offensive minded, quick to act, running around putting out fires of their own creation. Remember the Republicans saying "if you do this you're going to fuck up a whole bunch of shit over here and over there"? Well there you go. Macro-focused, defensive minded, slow to act, maintain the overall balance.

Is it any wonder why we don't get along? The Democrats keep fucking up the balance and creating more shit that needs to be fixed, and the Republicans won't get off their ass and take action because we're too busy thinking about it.

In my opinion this nation would be best served in regards to many (not all) things if the Democrats said "here's what we would like to accomplish" and then sat down, shut up, and let Republicans figure out a way to make it happen.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I see this over and over. Conservatives are for limited government. Just because we say we don't want government doing things where government is inept, counterproductive, wasteful or whatever, does not mean that we should shut it down totally.

Yes, we do need roads, bridges, highways, jails, schools, aircraft carriers, GPS satellites, standard weights and measures, courts, etc etc. Saying we don't need subsidies for crummy cars badly built and still with astronomical prices does not mean we don't need highways.

The conservative view is that the government should be a useful servant of the people's needs. However, you give it too much money, power, authority it becomes the worst sort of master.

So it's frustrating because they're obtuse, or because they're willfully obtuse?

 

[Foxfyre]

You know I have thought about this for a very long time and engaged in some deep analysis of the thought processes of my friends, acquaintances, and professional colleagues who are liberals and the conclusion I have reached is the following (sorry for the length...it's necessary unfortunately):

Liberals tend to be very micro-focused people. That doesn't mean small minded (that's a different argument ), it means their point of view is such that little things bother them more than big things. They are very good at identifying individual elements of an issue and creating quick, simple solutions that will effectively address that individual point. However, their focus on the small means they have a very bad habit of missing the big picture and understanding that changing one thing will force other things to change in order to compensate is usually beyond their natural comprehension level. They really have to work hard to understand that.

As they are more idealistic and optimistic, they tend to focus on "how things should be" instead of "how things are". That's great when an issue can be addressed in a vacuum because it offers the chance for true development of culture and humanity. However, as things can very rarely be addressed in a vacuum, reality tends to get in their way in a very frustrating and persistent manner.

They are usually very offensive minded and quick to action and experts at short-term strategy. In a game of chess for example they are more likely to use 2-3 pieces on a frontal assault right out of the gates while ignoring the development of any real pawn structure for defense. If their initial attack is effective they win. If not they are a sitting duck once their offensive is beaten back.

So what happens with liberals is they see one thing that is out of balance or seems to them to be unfair and it galls the living shit out of them. As they are offensive minded, quick actors they immediately jump into addressing the problem. They quickly create and implement an effective solution. However, as the big picture is beyond them they step back to look at the result and realize that their actions have cause reaction somewhere else and now something else is out of whack. So in the end the result is that they run around in circles putting out fires of their own creation.

Now for the Republican mind it's really the exact opposite. We tend to be macro-focused. It's the big picture that concerns us more. We don't mind if a few little elements are a little out of whack so long as the overall balance is maintained. We excel at understanding how taking action to address A will force B to change to compensate and that will in turn mean C will change and D and on down the line. As such we are experts in long-term strategy and creating solutions to problems that address an issue in a such a way that the effect on other things is reduced. However, our focus on the large means we tend to miss the subtle nuances of specific situations and probably don't appreciate enough how out of balance an individual issue might be when placed side by side with a small number of similar issues. Our focus is on everything as a whole.

We tend to be defensive minded and strategic planners. In a game of chess we will meticulously set up an impenetrable defensive line with pawns and multiple pieces and force our opponent beat himself to death against the brick wall we have established. But that takes time to develop and that means we are slow to show attacking force. As such, if we have the time to get our defense set up we will win the game. If we are forced to attack before we're ready or our defense can be disrupted while we are still developing it, then we're in big trouble.

We tend to more realistic and pessimistic so when a liberal starts talking about "how things should be" we tend to say "sounds great but it's impossible to establish because all this other stuff will have to change as a result and it will create a cluster fuck in the grand scheme." Usually we're right but that also means that we have a habit of leaving things alone which really do require attention.

So for us, when something is out of whack, we look at the issue, examine it with a microscope, consider every little possible effect on every little possible action, develop far reaching, complicated strategies and implement them. Usually it works out better, but it takes us fucking forever to do it because we spend an eternity analyzing it. That means that development and advancement of culture and humanity comes slower with the macro-focused Republicans.

Take some time and watch the news. Listen closely to what Democrats say and what the Republicans argue. It's an interesting exercise to watch FOX News and MSNBC back to back and listen closely for the difference in micro-focus and macro-focus when it comes to policy ideas and strategy and what each party defines as a "problem".

Think of the Obamacare. Remember the Democrats saying "just pass it and we'll fix it later"? Well there you go. Micro-focused, offensive minded, quick to act, running around putting out fires of their own creation. Remember the Republicans saying "if you do this you're going to fuck up a whole bunch of shit over here and over there"? Well there you go. Macro-focused, defensive minded, slow to act, maintain the overall balance.

Is it any wonder why we don't get along? The Democrats keep fucking up the balance and creating more shit that needs to be fixed, and the Republicans won't get off their ass and take action because we're too busy thinking about it.

In my opinion this nation would be best served in regards to many (not all) things if the Democrats said "here's what we would like to accomplish" and then sat down, shut up, and let Republicans figure out a way to make it happen.

Interesting perspective and I agree with much of what you say here. However, I don't want Democrats OR Republicans thinking government is the means of fixing anything. I want the federal government to provide the common defense, promote the general welfare (meaning EVERYBODY's welfare and not targeted groups), and secure our unalienable rights, and then leave us alone to form whatever sort of society we wish to have. I trust a free people with their rights secured to create a decent society more than I trust government at any level.

Modern American liberals look to government to create the society they think we should have.

Modern American conservatives know that government can't do that and will only continue to erode our liberties, opportunities, options, and prosperity the more it attempts to do so.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The most infuriating thing to conservatives when arguing with liberals is complexity. Conservatives tend to try to boil everything down to simplicity, the argument always starts when someone says "it's not that simple or clearcut."

Oh, yeah, THAT'S the problem: liberals are just too complex.

 

[koshergrl]

They're just too smart to be understood!!!!!

 

[BluePhantom]

Interesting perspective and I agree with much of what you say here. However, I don't want Democrats OR Republicans thinking government is the means of fixing anything. I want the federal government to provide the common defense, promote the general welfare (meaning EVERYBODY's welfare and not targeted groups), and secure our unalienable rights, and then leave us alone to form whatever sort of society we wish to have. I trust a free people with their rights secured to create a decent society more than I trust government at any level.

Modern American liberals look to government to create the society they think we should have.

Modern American conservatives know that government can't do that and will only continue to erode our liberties, opportunities, options, and prosperity the more it attempts to do so.

Oh I agree 100%. "Promoting the general welfare" and "securing our unalienable rights" to a Republican has a far different meaning than to a Democrat and I think my analysis applies there too. Democrats believe the government should do that in minutia. In other words it applies to every single little detail that must be manipulated and maintained, coerced and controlled. That's offensive minded, micro-thinking. The Republican definition tends to be "set up a solid foundation on a large scale and let the details work themselves out according to the given values and mores of a given sub-society." That's defensive minded, macro-thinking.

 

[Foxfyre]

Since we are talking Math and Science. Which States perform the best in Math and Science?

Massachusetts
Minnesota
New Jersey
New Hampshire
New York

And which perform the worst?

Mississippi
West Virginia
Louisiana
Alabama
New Mexico

State Education Rankings: The Best And Worst For Math And Science

It looks like you're implying that poor performance in math is the result of large populations of blacks and Hispanics. All the states that do well are Lilly white and all the states that do poorly have lots of blacks and/or Hispanics.

Good observation. I don't know that it is high populations of blacks and Hispanics that bring down the scores, but I believe high percentages of welfare recipients are absolutely a factor. New Mexico, for instance, has never had a Republican controlled legislature in all its years of existence. It celebrated its 100th birthday this year. The state sometimes votes Republican and sometimes votes Democrat for President but it is hardly a red state. After the 2008 election, both senators and all three legislators were Democrat and the state voted Obama.

New Mexico has a huge percentage of folks on some kind of public assistance and ranks at or near the bottom in almost every negative demographic category.

 

[Dr.Drock]

The most frustrating thing for me is when we're having a discussion and it goes like this;

Me: We've been throwing money at this problem and it's just getting worse.

Liberal: Throw more money at it, but not mine. Then it'll be fixed.

Like if someone says the fries are too salty, and they immediately reach for the salt shaker to make them better.

 

[jillian]

Since we are talking Math and Science. Which States perform the best in Math and Science?

Massachusetts
Minnesota
New Jersey
New Hampshire
New York

And which perform the worst?

Mississippi
West Virginia
Louisiana
Alabama
New Mexico

State Education Rankings: The Best And Worst For Math And Science

It looks like you're implying that poor performance in math is the result of large populations of blacks and Hispanics. All the states that do well are Lilly white and all the states that do poorly have lots of blacks and/or Hispanics.

really? a normal person would have said that poor red states perform poorly and wealthier blue states perform better.

but then again, you aren't exactly known for the sharpness of your mind.

 

[Fang]

Why I hate arguing with Liberals:

- It never even occurs to them to consider someone else's viewpoint.
- They don't care for facts.
- They feel the need to personally insult anyone that disagrees with them.
- "Pro-Choice" for them means "choose to see it my way or else".
- Rachael Maddow is all knowing and FoxNews doesn't know anything.
- Spread the Wealth. What they really mean is spread someone else's wealth.
- They would compromise America just to win their argument.

I could go on and on, but I need to go get lunch.

 

[zeke]

As such we are experts in long-term strategy and creating solutions to problems that address an issue in a such a way that the effect on other things is reduced. However, our focus on the large means we tend to miss the subtle nuances of specific situations and probably don't appreciate enough how out of balance an individual issue might be when placed side by side with a small number of similar issues.

Now that is funny. Must be thinking about the Republicanz and the Iraq war right there.
Well planned and looking out to the long term consequences. Made me spit my lunch.
Thanks.

 

[AquaAthena]

"What makes arguing with liberals so frustrating #1"

I wouldn't know; I don't do things that waste my time as I too highly value it.

"We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are?"

 

[Decepticon]

My guess would be how liberals use these things called "facts" which we hide in "books"

CON economics has failed. Dismally.
CONZ are losing the culture war.
CONZ are losing the middle class.

THAT'S what makes arguing with a liberal so frustrating.
You guys are WRONG all the time.

Perhaps when you wise up and base your OPINIONS on quantifiable data, instead of "AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!" then your arguments won't be so frustrating.

 

[rightwinger]

Since we are talking Math and Science. Which States perform the best in Math and Science?

Massachusetts
Minnesota
New Jersey
New Hampshire
New York

And which perform the worst?

Mississippi
West Virginia
Louisiana
Alabama
New Mexico

State Education Rankings: The Best And Worst For Math And Science

It looks like you're implying that poor performance in math is the result of large populations of blacks and Hispanics. All the states that do well are Lilly white and all the states that do poorly have lots of blacks and/or Hispanics.

Damn....I can't believe you just said that

You never fail to disappoint do you Fingerboy?

 

[Cecilie1200]

The most infuriating thing to conservatives when arguing with liberals is complexity. Conservatives tend to try to boil everything down to simplicity, the argument always starts when someone says "it's not that simple or clearcut."

lol you could make a book of conservative simple minded one liners.Yesterday I heard some conservative talk host give the retarded line 'Rising tides Lift all Boats".

Yeah, we know how allergic leftists are to the idea of any universal truth older than the Communist Manifesto.