Why arent inner cities utopias?

[The ClayTaurus]

Where and when? Sand Pit Road?

http://usmessageboard.com/showpost.php?p=521985&postcount=29

Your voracity is unique.

 

[Eightball]

How leftist are the San Francisco city supervisors if Dianne Feinstein is shocked by them?

That indeed, is very revealing!

 

[CockySOB]

Um, Clay? Here's a link to the US Dept. of Education
http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/pubs/npefs03/findings.asp#3

You'll notice that while DC ($11,847) is not THE highest spender per student, it comes in behind NJ ($12,568 per student) and very close to NY ($11,961). (Note: these are 2003 figures.)

So if DC has some of the lowest performance/achievement metrics as you seemed to stipulate in your post to Glockmail, then it would seem that at least on a cursory level, Glock's statement is true.

DC is one of the top spenders per student, with extremely poor results. I haven't looked over the rest of the statements made, but these two points seem to be verified. There are a number of conclusions which can be drawn, but in general the conclusion is that throwing money at education isn't sufficient for positive performance/achievement.

We should probably look at the per-state breakdown of this spending if we want to clarify areas that monies are used inefficiently.

 

[glockmail]

Heaven forbid if I'm not 100% accurate on every post.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Um, Clay? Here's a link to the US Dept. of Education
http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/pubs/npefs03/findings.asp#3

Thanks. And thanks for your thoughtful response.

You'll notice that while DC ($11,847) is not THE highest spender per student, it comes in behind NJ ($12,568 per student) and very close to NY ($11,961). (Note: these are 2003 figures.)

You are correct. Which makes glock's statement that they still spend the most incorrect.

So if DC has some of the lowest performance/achievement metrics as you seemed to stipulate in your post to Glockmail, then it would seem that at least on a cursory level, Glock's statement is true.

But if you look at how the money is spent, it's not making it to student instruction. It's being used to pay for unnecessary facilities. Did you see that despite spending the most money per student, 12% of classrooms did not have text books? If I was mayor and I funded my crack habit through the education budget, that would make the education budget skyrocket, and the average per student spending would seem quite high, when in reality none of that money actually went to the student.

DC is one of the top spenders per student, with extremely poor results. I haven't looked over the rest of the statements made, but these two points seem to be verified. There are a number of conclusions which can be drawn, but in general the conclusion is that throwing money at education isn't sufficient for positive performance/achievement.

And if you were to actually look over the rest of the statements, you would see the money is not in fact being thrown at their education - it's being thrown at a number of things while everyone calls it education spending.

We should probably look at the per-state breakdown of this spending if we want to clarify areas that monies are used inefficiently.

That is a very good idea. We should also look at HOW the money gets spent. As I said, you could put millions and millions of dollars in the "education" budget and not have any of it go to the education of anyone.

So yes, if glock meant that just throwing money into an education budget and not caring what happens to it or how it is actually spent will not solve any problems, I wholeheartedly agree. I thought that was a pretty obvious notion.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I thought this article might be relevant here.

Whenever I start thinking about all the damage that’s been done to America by the social engineering Socialists, I have to remind myself that some of my best friends are left-wingers. That doesn’t do much for my blood pressure, but at least it serves to remind me that they’re not all as self-righteous as George Soros, as fatuous as Michael Moore, as smarmy as Jimmy Carter, as shrill as Nancy Pelosi, as hypocritical as John Murtha, Ted Kennedy and Robert C. Byrd, or as deceptive as Barack Obama, the fellow with the most liberal voting record in the U.S. Senate who has managed to convince millions of people who should know better that he’s a card-carrying centrist.

I didn’t include Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton among the usual suspects because it’s probably not fair to even call these two cheap race hustlers Democrats. In truth, they’re nothing but a couple of con men who’d probably be peddling the Brooklyn Bridge to foreign tourists if this black leader gig hadn’t panned out so well.

The whole question of race is a dicey one. Pity the poor fool who wades into those troubled waters. Well, here goes. If a black person tells the truth -- namely, that in 2007, 99% of black problems are self-inflicted -- he is, like Bill Cosby and Thomas Sowell, dismissed as an Uncle Tom. If a white person tells the truth -- namely, that with a 70% illegitimacy rate, no amount of government hand-outs will do anything but provide the cancer victim with a very expensive band-aid -- he’s condemned as a racist.

When blacks say they wish to have a dialogue with whites, it only means that they want a forum at which to bash whites, while their victims provide a Greek chorus of mea culpas, provide the coffee and Danish, and drop a little something in the collection plate on their way out.

There is such a thing as white prejudice. No doubt about it. But it has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with character, culture and values. What blacks refuse to acknowledge is that whites are intolerant of crime and the creeps who commit it, be they black thugs or white trash. The latter are those lowlifes who form Aryan gangs; tattoo themselves with skulls and swastikas; and produce, distribute and use methamphetamines. I don’t know a single white person who isn’t ashamed to be of the same race as these vicious cretins.

But if a person such as Bill Cosby says he’s ashamed of the promiscuity, drug use and illiteracy, that plague the black underclass, he’s called names. The real shame should be that millions of black kids are fatherless; that their taste in music is for anything that’s crude, lewd and loud; that their role models are too often basketball players who make more babies than baskets; whose language skills are embarrassingly abysmal; and that, although most of the street punks are peddling drugs for roughly the minimum wage, they regard it as a worthier, more manly pursuit than working at a 7/11 or, God forbid, going to church, school or a library.

Most whites in this country are not racist. In their heart, they agree with black comedian Chris Rock when he says, “I love black people, but I hate *******,” even if they themselves are not allowed to make such an honest declaration.

Actually, what most whites are is cowardly. When we see black kids with the top of their baggy pants drooping somewhere south of their butts, annoying people with their ear-splitting boom boxes, saying “they be” when they mean “they are,” and we pretend that theirs is a different, but equally fine culture as our own, we’re no better than those enablers who give money to drug addicts or booze to alcoholics.

When we finally stop patronizing loafers, louts and criminals, stop encouraging people who were born 120 years after the Emancipation Proclamation, 20 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act, to pretend that their sloth and ignorance are the fault of whites, only then will blacks come one step closer to having that colorblind society they claim they want.


http://www.townhall.com/columnists/BurtPrelutsky/2007/01/22/black_racism

 

[glockmail]

.... if you were to actually look over the rest of the statements, you would see the money is not in fact being thrown at their education - it's being thrown at a number of things while everyone calls it education spending. .....

Yous gets whats yous votes for. When yous votes for crooks, yous get crooks.

 

[CockySOB]

Clay, don't even get me started on the cottage industry which is academic publishing & textbooks. I know that not everything spent in the name of education is, in fact, for education. However, if the same standards are used across all states as the Dept. of Education numbers are, then the fact remains that spending attributed to education is still as high as $11k-12k per student in three of our East Coast states. What should be noted is that the three states which incur the largest spending per student are New Jersey, New York and Dist. of Colombia. I would have thought that more rural areas would incur a higher cost per student for the sheer fact that you'd have smaller class-sizes reducing the cost-effectiveness of most primary or secondary teachers. So I'm left to wonder just what those states ARE spending their education dollars on.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Clay, don't even get me started on the cottage industry which is academic publishing & textbooks. I know that not everything spent in the name of education is, in fact, for education. However, if the same standards are used across all states as the Dept. of Education numbers are, then the fact remains that spending attributed to education is still as high as $11k-12k per student in three of our East Coast states. What should be noted is that the three states which incur the largest spending per student are New Jersey, New York and Dist. of Colombia. I would have thought that more rural areas would incur a higher cost per student for the sheer fact that you'd have smaller class-sizes reducing the cost-effectiveness of most primary or secondary teachers. So I'm left to wonder just what those states ARE spending their education dollars on.

Regarding rural versus urban, go back and re-read my links that I posted earlier. They answer that question.

 

[glockmail]

.... So I'm left to wonder just what those states ARE spending their education dollars on.

As a former resident of NY I can attest that my local tax burden has decreased by a factor of between 3 and 4. The State income tax rate is about the same but in NC the State pays for teachers salaries and student transportation. So to answer your question I can only state what I have seen or surmised:
-huge state-wide administration campus with a bloated bureaucracy
-palatial buildings, athletic complexes and grounds
-too low student/ teacher ratio
-“special programs”
-layers of administrators and support staff
-employee benefit programs and union activities.

 

[William Joyce]

Yes, but in Britain for example, their inner-city shitholes are filled with trashy whites. They refer to them as townies, NEDs, chavs, etc.

There are many reasons for the state of american cities. Most all of them have to do with big government.

1) Welfare: It's a bad idea for government bureaucrats to pay people to not work. You can't weed out the bums from the needy when you don't even know them like the rest of the community does. When charity was handled by volunteer groups back in the day, their primary focus was instilling virtues of thrift, sobriety, and hard work, and integrating them back into productive society. Government bureaucrats have every incentive to not do that; reducing the numbers of the poor reduces the perceived need for their services. And besides that, when you give someone a check for being unemployed, it's only for being unemployed in the above-ground economy. They can still sell drugs while collecting their checks.

For more on this, I highly recommend the book The Tragedy of American Compassion. It's a detailed account of how charity used to work in america, and what happened to change it for the worse.

2) Public housing: aka, criminal breeding facilities. You effectively segregate people from the greater society, and cram them into concrete bunkers. They are cut off from learning good habits from productive people, and see only the bad habits of those around them.

3) The war on drugs: It creates a teriffic opportunity for people to earn money without working hard. Arrests also stain people's resumes if they want to gain productive employment.

4) Minimum wage laws, payroll taxes, inflation: The first two serve to restrict entry-level employment, which is necessary to move up. Inflation is a stealth flat tax which hurts working people and benefits people with appreciating assets. It also changes the time preferences of people; they tend to persue short-sighted endeavors rather than think long-term.

5) Property taxes and other tax incentives: Keeping your property looking nice means you pay higher taxes. Thus we see land in the middle of cities that should be prime real estate, laying unused, or being used as parking lots. Other tax incentives reward shitty disposeable 1-story buildings. Looking at aerial views of modern american cities, you'd think it was america that got bombed into smithereens in WWII instead of Germany.

6) Post-WWII government policy: After WWII, the attitude of local, state, and federal governments towards road building and development changed. Neighborhoods that were poor but cohesive were pushed out by government road builders to built superhighways. This ruined the urban environment and then provided a great way to escape, for those who could afford it. Those who couldn't, well...you see the same issue with public housing, poor people isolated from the more successful people in society.

Other government policies: Government has made car ownership nearly mandatory, hurting the poor. They mandate low-density development, and they forbid mixed-use zoning (apartments on top of retail, which used to be common), thus increasing the cost of housing. Try and find people crying for the need for affordable housing or public housing before the 30's, you won't find it.

It's really a fascinating topic, if you want to read more check out Suburban Nation or Geography of Nowhere. Yeah, some of it was left-ish, but I was really suprised to see how much of it was a rant against government, particularly centralized government.

Geography of Nowhere, decent book.

Baron, these are all solid arguments on their own, but I still maintain that the nastiness of the inner city is largely a product of racial patterns in behavior. If "big government" were really what was preventing blacks from creating societies identical to Sweden, then the wide swaths of Africa where there's near-anarchy would look like Stockholm.

But they don't. They look like shitholes. And surprisingly similar shitholes.

Stats show that the IQ of a nation correlates almost perfectly with its standard of living and wealth creation. Japan, Germany, Nordic countries... high IQs, high standards. Haiti, Uganda... low IQs, low standards. Irrefutable data:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations

If anyone wants to see something really fascinating, look at how AIDS rates in Africa match almost head-for-head the AIDS rates in inner-city D.C. and Detroit. Try explaining that one away!

 

[glockmail]

....
Stats show that the IQ of a nation correlates almost perfectly with its standard of living and wealth creation. ...

How do you explain the high IQs of Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Bill Cosby, Tiger Woods...?

 

[William Joyce]

How do you explain the high IQs of Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Bill Cosby, Tiger Woods...?

According to the data cited above (also covered in The Bell Curve), the AVERAGE black IQ is 15 points lower than the AVERAGE white IQ. So it's quite possible for a single black person to have a higher IQ than a single white person, and even the average white IQ.

But these averages do count in the policy debates. It makes no sense to demand that blacks perform exactly as well as whites academically, because even if all systems were working perfectly, there'd still be a difference. But our society rejects this idea and insists that "all races are equal" and if not, "something must be done." Well, something is being done now, only it's all for the bad... affirmative action, grade inflation, grade deflation, score manipulation, etc., not to mention the constant drumbeat from the media that 'white racism' is keeping black students down.

There is a ton of reading on this if you're interested.

One accessible writer on the topic is Steve Sailer, a writer for The American Conservative:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Sailer

 

[glockmail]

.... if all systems were working perfectly, there'd still be a difference. ...

Perhaps this is where we differ. If I adopted a black baby, then I'd expect him to make up that 15 points easily.

 

[Eightball]

How do you explain the high IQs of Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Bill Cosby, Tiger Woods...?

There does seem to be a dumbing-down happening in the U.S..

There are many other countries in the world that are doing much better in the education area than the U.S..

I think that history is sorely lacking in our schools. We learn from the mistakes and victories that our nation is/was involved in. We also learn from other nation's history too.

We also have a sore lack of understanding of our governmental system; i.e. the three branches of the government, what it means to be a Republic, versus a pure Democracy, etc.. I.E our roots as Americans.

Very few school kids are taught very much at all about WW2, or the Holocaust, Normandy, etc..

I'm actually quite concerned that history is being revised in ways that isolate our populous from the realities of life, that stimulate perserverance, etc.. I think our country needs to have a strong survivalistic vein running through it's people. Schools need to be a place that restores or fills the void of missing American values that made this country so strong in the past.

I remember when I was in elementary school that English had to be spoken in our classroom(4th grade). There were two kids in our class who were of Mexican decent. They were bi-lingual, which most likely meant that their parents spoke in Mexican at home, yet the kids learned English outside their home.

Anyway, these two classmates actually spoke Mexican back and forth to each other while in our classroom, and sat in front of me. I'll never forget our 4th grade teacher, Miss Barbarez, walking over to those two classmates and warning them to not speak anything, but English in her class. This wasn't a mild warning either. The two kids never used Mexican in the class again. No doubt they spoke it at recess, and outside school with others of their cultural background, but it was taboo, in California public school rooms back in the 1950's.

Now we have classrooms set aside for every ethnic group that doesn't have English as their native language. We propogate dis-unity instead of propagating a mixing of our boiling pot of cultures or immigrants.

Our California ballots come in a myriad of languages.

We are doing a dis-service to those that come here legally and are inserted into special education classes that keep them from integrating into our English speaking society.

I guess this is cultural tolerance. It joins the ranks of political tolerance, and religious tolerance. We are just plain losing the national back bone or spine.

I know how many folks can't handle this guy, and he gets over the top for me to at times, but Mike Savage says, "Borders, Language, Culture" are the glue of a nation. I totally agree with him.

I think the major teacher's unions have had a strong influence in negatively affecting this gradual dumbing-down of our country. They have tried to politicize the classroom, with Liberal ideals in subtle, and covert ways. Sadly, teachers don't have a choice when it comes to what materials they can use to teach a subject. They also don't have much choice in what teacher's unions to join. This does vary from state to state. I think in California you have Union A or B. One is a little less, socialistic/Marxist than the other.

The major union has fought teacher testing and anything that would endanger Job "Seniority".

I didn't realize until recently how powerful the major teacher's union is in our country. It's also so liberal left-leaning as to make most other unions in our country look rather mild in comparison.

It looks like for a time our country is going to swing left, and go through a spineless period not unlike the Ford, Carter years. Maybe this is a healthy thing? Maybe this will awaken even the independents and the "Wishy Washy" Americans that never seem to care what goes on with their government, but only hope to not miss another American Idol show.

 

[glockmail]

There does seem to be a dumbing-down happening in the U.S.. .....

I agree completely. California is the a vision of America's future, and its driven by liberalism, teacher's unions, etc.

I think it will take more than a period of liberal politics and resultant financial decay to reverse the trend, however. We now have an entire generation of people mis-educated in history, poorly educated in math and science, and no idea how to set goals and persevere. Then the Damnocrats pander to them with promises of wealth re-distribution. Add to that the culture of sex, violence, and hatred of religion propagated by Hollywood and we've got a nation of sex-starved idiots with their hands out. Our culture is also weakened by multi- culturalism and multi- language agenda.

Look to Europe if you want to see what California will be like in ten or twenty years. Once again they are blind to what is happening. They’ll be taken over by the Muslims, by the simple fact that they breed 4 times faster. If Israel survives until then Sharia Law in Euro-Arabia will ensure its demise.

 

[theHawk]

I agree completely. California is the a vision of America's future, and its driven by liberalism, teacher's unions, etc.

Which is exactly why businesses and jobs are fleeing California.

 

[Eightball]

I agree completely. California is the a vision of America's future, and its driven by liberalism, teacher's unions, etc.

I think it will take more than a period of liberal politics and resultant financial decay to reverse the trend, however. We now have an entire generation of people mis-educated in history, poorly educated in math and science, and no idea how to set goals and persevere. Then the Damnocrats pander to them with promises of wealth re-distribution. Add to that the culture of sex, violence, and hatred of religion propagated by Hollywood and we've got a nation of sex-starved idiots with their hands out. Our culture is also weakened by multi- culturalism and multi- language agenda.

Look to Europe if you want to see what California will be like in ten or twenty years. Once again they are blind to what is happening. They’ll be taken over by the Muslims, by the simple fact that they breed 4 times faster. If Israel survives until then Sharia Law in Euro-Arabia will ensure its demise.

I agree with you in every aspect of your post, with a minor "however".

I would say one thing. In some ways, referring to the Muslims as "breeding" 4:1 in their favor, sometimes reminds me of how the Germans referred to the Jews. They wanted to halt the Jewish "breeding", thus the "camps" came into being.

Please don't take my comment personally, I just have a hard time with the "breeding" reference. I was born right after WW2 and that war and the holocaust was impressed into every "baby boomer" of that time.

I do agree with you that they are having their off-spring at a much higher rate than other ethnic/religious groups. When you start passing up Catholics, your really putting out kids. lol

Obviously, birth control, minimizing the size of families to hopefully two parents, and 1.5 children has been the goal of eco-anxious socialists. Over population = famine to most of these socialists. The Muslims don't buy into this, and just have children without restraint.

I don't think the average Muslims dream is, "Have lots of children and out-populate the rest of the world, and thus, take it over by numbers.". It's just a result of their culture, and religion that seems to supercede economic considerations, environmental concerns.

Also remember that most Muslims have come from countries that see large families in an positive economic sense. The infant mortality rate is higher, and also childen = family workers, who help Mom and Pop survive. They work the farm or the fields, and tend the live stock. This is not unlike early America where our settlers/ancestors had large families with everyone pitching in.

I just have a hard time referring to humans as "breeders" and then isolating it to a religious/cultural group. I feel as though it in some way dehumanizes them.

Glock: I know that you're a caring person, and my comments weren't intended to "attack" you as a person, but to express some of my thoughts on these folks/Muslims being referred to as breeders. By their sheer birth-rate they are destined to change European economys, laws, ethics, etc, and maybe incite a major civil war because of the latter.

 

[glockmail]

....
Glock: I know that you're a caring person, and my comments weren't intended to "attack" you as a person, but to express some of my thoughts on these folks/Muslims being referred to as breeders. By their sheer birth-rate they are destined to change European economys, laws, ethics, etc, and maybe incite a major civil war because of the latter.

I appreciate your kindness and profound posts.

That being said, from my view Islam is an evil religion with the stated goal of global domination and repression or outright extiction of all other religions, as well as death to all Jews. The fact is that they are poised to breed themselves into a majority in Europe, and once they do they will do as much killing as necessary to convert the minority. It is so written in the Koran.

 

[Eightball]

I appreciate your kindness and profound posts.

That being said, from my view Islam is an evil religion with the stated goal of global domination and repression or outright extiction of all other religions, as well as death to all Jews. The fact is that they are poised to breed themselves into a majority in Europe, and once they do they will do as much killing as necessary to convert the minority. It is so written in the Koran.

I sure hope we as Western culture and society can quelch this onslaught before we are endangered to the point of no return.