Without education, what kind of jobs will be available to young Americans?

[Texanmike]

Uhm, if he wanted to ask about cuts in spending for education, I think he would have asked about cuts in spending for education. There are many in this country waging a war on Education as a concept, and Science in particular. Trying to re-write history text books or trying to force Intelligent Design into schools as hard science, has nothing to do with spending cuts.

So why do it?

there are many?

I dont think many.

Off the top of my head:

Climate Change
Evolution
Stem Cell Research
American History

Have all come under attack in recent years. Not to mention the basic idea of Logic has pretty much been tossed out the window by anyone the Right. But not so much the specifics is what's the problem, but the fact that these attacks attack the process.

For example, many "conservatives" like to attack the Theory of Evolution, saying "Well, it's just a theory. I have a theory too." They don't want to acknowledge that in the Scientific Community, a Theory has weight. It's been tested and has evidence supporting it. It's been upgraded from a Hypothesis (remember that word?). Calling "Intelligent Design" a "Theory" the same as the Theory of Evolution, is an attack on the Scientific Process.

If this keeps up, the Chinese will be inventing everything and we will be working for them.

Have you noticed what you're doing?

"Climate change"

Who is debating that the climate is changing? Up for debate is what is causing the climate change. But we can't even decide how the climate is changing. Global cooling? Global warming? Just changing?

"Evolution"

Again. You can represent it however you like but it is a theory. If you are all for the "scientific process" then you will understand that the "theory" of Evolution is in the same stage as the "theory" of Intelligent Design. Both have been tested and both have proponents. The fact that you happen to agree with Evolution doesn't make it any more or less valid to the guy after you. The same goes for Intelligent Design.

Stem Cell research. Embryonic Stem Cell Research, to be specific. Some people actually view that as morally wrong. There are people who are against Eugenics too. That is a science. It just happens to be one that most of us find to be immoral. Funny thing huh? Are you saying that if I regect the study of Euginics that I am against science?

"American History"

You would be surprised at how little history you were taught. Most of what we get is a fourth generation washed down version of history. History has been rewritten for all of history. If you want to learn anything about history go get a book written at the time of the event.

Funny, you didn't list Math, English, Geology or anything that doesn't have a raging political debate. I wonder if your debate is political in nature...

Mike

 

[JWBooth]

Education or indoctrination?

 

[Jarhead]

there are many?

I dont think many.

Off the top of my head:

Climate Change
Evolution
Stem Cell Research
American History

Have all come under attack in recent years. Not to mention the basic idea of Logic has pretty much been tossed out the window by anyone the Right. But not so much the specifics is what's the problem, but the fact that these attacks attack the process.

For example, many "conservatives" like to attack the Theory of Evolution, saying "Well, it's just a theory. I have a theory too." They don't want to acknowledge that in the Scientific Community, a Theory has weight. It's been tested and has evidence supporting it. It's been upgraded from a Hypothesis (remember that word?). Calling "Intelligent Design" a "Theory" the same as the Theory of Evolution, is an attack on the Scientific Process.

If this keeps up, the Chinese will be inventing everything and we will be working for them.

Have you noticed what you're doing?

"Climate change"

Who is debating that the climate is changing? Up for debate is what is causing the climate change. But we can't even decide how the climate is changing. Global cooling? Global warming? Just changing?

"Evolution"

Again. You can represent it however you like but it is a theory. If you are all for the "scientific process" then you will understand that the "theory" of Evolution is in the same stage as the "theory" of Intelligent Design. Both have been tested and both have proponents. The fact that you happen to agree with Evolution doesn't make it any more or less valid to the guy after you. The same goes for Intelligent Design.

Stem Cell research. Embryonic Stem Cell Research, to be specific. Some people actually view that as morally wrong. There are people who are against Eugenics too. That is a science. It just happens to be one that most of us find to be immoral. Funny thing huh? Are you saying that if I regect the study of Euginics that I am against science?

"American History"

You would be surprised at how little history you were taught. Most of what we get is a fourth generation washed down version of history. History has been rewritten for all of history. If you want to learn anything about history go get a book written at the time of the event.

Funny, you didn't list Math, English, Geology or anything that doesn't have a raging political debate. I wonder if your debate is political in nature...

Mike

I finally saw the whole direction of this thread.

On things that are up for debate, if you dont see it the same way as DBS and Rdean, then you are 100% educating our society.

Pathetic form of debate.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Some in this country are fighting education. Especially science. Without an education, what kind of jobs will be available? Or don't people care?

Better question is what kind of jobs is our current piss poor education system preparing students for?

Social promotion and grading on the curve have done more damage to this country than any terrorist plot.

 

[signelect]

We all agree that education is a mess but we don't agree on what to do. There are three kinds of people in the world:

1. People who watch what happens and reports(47.5%)

2. People who wonder what happened and do nothing (47.5%)

3. People who make things happen (5%)

The question is which are you, I have not read one suggestion of how to fix it just who to blame for it. Looks like 1 or 2 for most of you.

 

[Texanmike]

A question about jobs and what jobs will be available in the future and you think that has nothing to do with what's currently going on?

Wow.

The question was asked in a manner that it forces people to concede something that is not true. See if you follow this example.


"With gay people wanting to force a homosexual lifestyle on heterosexuals why do support gay marriage?"

The first part of the question is not true. By answering the question without addressing the conditional it appears that you are conceding the first part of the question. If you ask good questions then you will get good answers. If you ask rhetorical questions and implant half truth into the question then you must debate the merits of the question before you can argue the answer to the question. Difficult to grasp?

Mike

Not at all difficult to grasp. But I think you're debating something that is already proven. Clearly there are people in this country fighting against Education, and I'm not talking about funding. Without an Education, your job prospects are limited. That's a fact.

So the question is valid. What kind of jobs will be available?

You see. Here is the problem. "Proven". That is an opinion. We can't even agree on what education is. If the focus on getting an education is for the purpose of jobs then why is evolution or intelligent design taught to anyone other than people in a field like that? Why do we teach a predigested version of history? Why didn't you ask "why don't we spend more money on teaching kids math?"

I find it hard to believe that the concentration of this question was about jobs because the list of subjects you were worried about had very little to do with employment other than stem cells and we are finding all kinds of things to do with cells other than embryonic stem cells. I want to know why we are putting money into sex ed and morality, things that should be taught at home. Why, for that matter, is there one standard of education? There are some very intelligent people on both sides of the Evolution/Intelligent Design theory debate and in reality that has very little to do with why jobs are disappearning.

In reality "Education" is not the problem with jobs and it likely won't be in the future. With increasing drop out rates why are we spending money on kids/parents who don't care? Why are we diverting funds from people who give a damn about their future? You don't see that as a war on education?

Mike

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

What people are pushing back on is the left's attempts at turning public education into public sponsored indoctrination where children spend the bulk of their day studying the ills of capitalism, "My Two Mommy's", putting condoms on cucumbers and being told that you can't really win or lose so everybody gets a "triangle" instead of a grade.

And frankly, fuck you if you have a problem with that.

Bye!

 

[Moonglow]

Some in this country are fighting education. Especially science. Without an education, what kind of jobs will be available? Or don't people care?

I believe we would do better with more vocational traing during high school. Not everyone is a brainiac that is able to succeed at higher education.

 

[Texanmike]

We all agree that education is a mess but we don't agree on what to do. There are three kinds of people in the world:

1. People who watch what happens and reports(47.5%)

2. People who wonder what happened and do nothing (47.5%)

3. People who make things happen (5%)

The question is which are you, I have not read one suggestion of how to fix it just who to blame for it. Looks like 1 or 2 for most of you.

Perspective is... a dangerous thing.

Mike

 

[deregulateTHIS]

I think education is essential for our survival. Otherwise, we would still be grunting at each other and clubbing animals in the head for dinner.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I think education is essential for our survival. Otherwise, we would still be grunting at each other and clubbing animals in the head for dinner.

You seem to forget that one had to teach their young to club animals over the head without getting killed by said animal. Was that not education?

 

[DontBeStupid]

I find it hard to believe that the concentration of this question was about jobs because the list of subjects you were worried about had very little to do with employment other than stem cells

/sigh

I only listed them because people like you and others were claiming there was ZERO attacks on Education. Clearly, that is not the case. And you just did it yourself in a previous post calling Evolution "just a theory". Do you even know what a Scientific Theory is? What it takes to get that title? I don't think you do.

But again, taking these examples, taking the obvious push for less and less money to be spent on education, how can anyone claim there is ZERO attacks? That's choosing to be ignorant.

 

[DontBeStupid]

Some in this country are fighting education. Especially science. Without an education, what kind of jobs will be available? Or don't people care?

I believe we would do better with more vocational traing during high school. Not everyone is a brainiac that is able to succeed at higher education.

Absolutely! 100% agree!

That takes money though, and there are those who want as little money spent on educating people. Therein lies the challenge.

 

[Londoner]

You can't buy your way out of dumb, RDean, no matter how much money is thrown at you.

School districts had total expenditures of approximately $596.6 billion in 2007–08, including about $506.8 billion in current expenditures for public elementary and secondary education. Of the remaining expenditures, nearly $65.8 billion was spent on capital outlay, almost $15.7 billion on interest payments on debt, and $8.3 billion on other programs (including programs such as community services and adult education, which are not a part of public elementary and secondary education).

After adjustment for inflation, current expenditures per student in fall enrollment at public schools rose during the 1980s, remained stable during the first part of the 1990s, and rose again after 1992–93. There was an increase of 37 percent from 1980–81 to 1990–91; a change of less than 1 percent from 1990–91 to 1994–95 (which resulted from small decreases at the beginning of this period, followed by small increases after 1992–93); and an increase of 32 percent from 1994–95 to 2007–08. In 2007–08, current expenditures per student in fall enrollment were $10,297 in unadjusted dollars. In 2007–08, some 55 percent of students in public schools were transported at public expense at a cost of $854 per pupil transported, also in unadjusted dollars.

Money doesn't seem to be working.

Start with teaching your children some values at home

Exactly.

Having the time to teach values at home was possible during the postwar years when a family could survive on the father's wages and benefits. Indeed, because of the old Liberal/New Deal wage structure, the mother could afford to stay at home and raise the children. The father also had more time to be at home for the family. This structure was made possible because of the government imposed compromise between capital and Labor.

While paying such high wages had obvious drawbacks, there were some incredible benefits. For one, the high wage structure resulted in the greatest consumption economy on earth. Why? Because unlike 3rd world laborers which made pennies a day, the American working class could actually afford to buy what they produced. Meaning: high wages and benefits resulted in massive consumer demand. And what happens when there is massive consumer demand? The capitalist must innovate and add jobs to capture that demand.

The high wages, benefits, and entitlements of the postwar years lead to a golden era of capitalism - a time when more Americans had a slice of the American dream, and average workers could send their kids to college. Why? because Government invested tax dollars into the creation of world class public universities, i.e., affordable education for the masses. And the result? America lead the world in education and upward mobility for the poor). Of course this was before the wealthy began to attack public schools for the purpose of lowering the tax burden on the wealthy (which was high in order to sustain a powerful middle class).

In the 70's, once Germany and Japan re-industrialized and began to encroach on America's postwar manufacturing dominance, Capital grew restless. Their restlessness made sense because less money was coming in. Point is: concessions to labor were getting tougher to swallow. So what did capital do? It invested heavily in a political party.

Enter Ronald Reagan, who was sent to Washington to reverse Labor's long held advantage over capital - an advantage built by 45 years of Liberal hegemony. Reagan convinced America to un-burden capital from the taxes, regulations, and over-priced labor of the postwar years. He said that this would create efficiency gains which would deliver more jobs, more innovation, and cheaper prices for all. America listened and spent the next 30 years under the spell of Reaganomics. Oddly, the jobs didn't really trickle down as promised; they trickled overseas to sweatshops.

Under Reagan, the working and middle class - having lost wages and benefits - required more and more debt to maintain purchasing power and standard of living. [Morning in America was actually the golden age of credit-based consumption. Google this for yourself. Look at the amount of debt American families assumed starting with Reagan. It will blow your mind. America was fooled into thinking that their postwar prosperity had returned. In truth, they were entering a 30 year credit-orgy which would end in the death of the American economy: sorry folks, you can't borrow forever] Because Reagan destroyed the old Liberal wage/benefit structure, each successive president had to figure out a different set of bubble-&-credit gimmicks to make up for the lack of real wages (which fueled consumption). Meanwhile, because of their tax breaks and lowered labor costs, the wealthy saw unprecedented gains.

[Worse, the wealthy had so much surplus capital that Wall Street struggled to find sufficient investment opportunities; therefore, they invented one hedge and derivative ponzi scheme after another. Reagnaomics underfunded the "consumption" class (which meant they had to over-rely on credit), while, at the same time, over-funding the investment class (which meant they over-invested in risky garbage). In short, the distribution scheme created by Reagan turned into a disaster for both the real economy of goods and services, and the Wall Street economy of investments and financialization]

The middle class was told that the money from the unprecedented gains would trickle down - but what they actually saw was a 30 year erosion of wages and benefits as capital was freed to pursue Mexican, Asian, and 3rd world sweatshop labor.

If not the middle class, where did the profits trickle down to? Answer: politicians, think tanks, and popular media. The wealthy used their profits to launch an ideological war against everything which put upward pressure on taxes, including public infrastructure and public education. They paid an army of statisticians and media personalities to convince America that it should no longer fund anything. Indeed, everything - and I mean everything - formerly done for the middle class would now be cut in order to give more tax cuts to the wealthy. And where did the tax cuts get re-invested: Government and Media . . . so that they could keep the ruse going.

American swallowed poison in 1980. The patient is almost dead.

 

[Photonic]

there are many?

I dont think many.

Off the top of my head:

Climate Change
Evolution
Stem Cell Research
American History

Have all come under attack in recent years. Not to mention the basic idea of Logic has pretty much been tossed out the window by anyone the Right. But not so much the specifics is what's the problem, but the fact that these attacks attack the process.

For example, many "conservatives" like to attack the Theory of Evolution, saying "Well, it's just a theory. I have a theory too." They don't want to acknowledge that in the Scientific Community, a Theory has weight. It's been tested and has evidence supporting it. It's been upgraded from a Hypothesis (remember that word?). Calling "Intelligent Design" a "Theory" the same as the Theory of Evolution, is an attack on the Scientific Process.

If this keeps up, the Chinese will be inventing everything and we will be working for them.

Have you noticed what you're doing?

"Climate change"

Who is debating that the climate is changing? Up for debate is what is causing the climate change. But we can't even decide how the climate is changing. Global cooling? Global warming? Just changing?

"Evolution"

Again. You can represent it however you like but it is a theory. If you are all for the "scientific process" then you will understand that the "theory" of Evolution is in the same stage as the "theory" of Intelligent Design. Both have been tested and both have proponents. The fact that you happen to agree with Evolution doesn't make it any more or less valid to the guy after you. The same goes for Intelligent Design.

Stem Cell research. Embryonic Stem Cell Research, to be specific. Some people actually view that as morally wrong. There are people who are against Eugenics too. That is a science. It just happens to be one that most of us find to be immoral. Funny thing huh? Are you saying that if I regect the study of Euginics that I am against science?

"American History"

You would be surprised at how little history you were taught. Most of what we get is a fourth generation washed down version of history. History has been rewritten for all of history. If you want to learn anything about history go get a book written at the time of the event.

Funny, you didn't list Math, English, Geology or anything that doesn't have a raging political debate. I wonder if your debate is political in nature...

Mike

You are so wrong it actually hurt my eyes to read the part about the Theory of evolution.

Which is in the same stage as the Theory of Relativity, and the Theory of Gravity, and the Theory of Light.

Sorry but it simply isn't true, and what you said constitutes a blindness to an educated view on what evolution actually is.

 

[ClosedCaption]

there are many?

I dont think many.

Off the top of my head:

Climate Change
Evolution
Stem Cell Research
American History

Have all come under attack in recent years. Not to mention the basic idea of Logic has pretty much been tossed out the window by anyone the Right. But not so much the specifics is what's the problem, but the fact that these attacks attack the process.

For example, many "conservatives" like to attack the Theory of Evolution, saying "Well, it's just a theory. I have a theory too." They don't want to acknowledge that in the Scientific Community, a Theory has weight. It's been tested and has evidence supporting it. It's been upgraded from a Hypothesis (remember that word?). Calling "Intelligent Design" a "Theory" the same as the Theory of Evolution, is an attack on the Scientific Process.

If this keeps up, the Chinese will be inventing everything and we will be working for them.

Have you noticed what you're doing?

"Climate change"

Who is debating that the climate is changing? Up for debate is what is causing the climate change. But we can't even decide how the climate is changing. Global cooling? Global warming? Just changing?

"Evolution"

Again. You can represent it however you like but it is a theory. If you are all for the "scientific process" then you will understand that the "theory" of Evolution is in the same stage as the "theory" of Intelligent Design. Both have been tested and both have proponents. The fact that you happen to agree with Evolution doesn't make it any more or less valid to the guy after you. The same goes for Intelligent Design.

Stem Cell research. Embryonic Stem Cell Research, to be specific. Some people actually view that as morally wrong. There are people who are against Eugenics too. That is a science. It just happens to be one that most of us find to be immoral. Funny thing huh? Are you saying that if I regect the study of Euginics that I am against science?

"American History"

You would be surprised at how little history you were taught. Most of what we get is a fourth generation washed down version of history. History has been rewritten for all of history. If you want to learn anything about history go get a book written at the time of the event.

Funny, you didn't list Math, English, Geology or anything that doesn't have a raging political debate. I wonder if your debate is political in nature...

Mike

Hold the fucking phone! Did you just say Intelligent Design has been tested? Dude, you're kidding right?

 

[DontBeStupid]

putting condoms on cucumbers

Yes, because we all know, that teaching kids to have safe sex is EXACTLY the same as telling them to run out and fuck five strangers.

Thanks for the example, ass hat.

 

[Photonic]

We all agree that education is a mess but we don't agree on what to do. There are three kinds of people in the world:

1. People who watch what happens and reports(47.5%)

2. People who wonder what happened and do nothing (47.5%)

3. People who make things happen (5%)

The question is which are you, I have not read one suggestion of how to fix it just who to blame for it. Looks like 1 or 2 for most of you.

I prefer to make things happen. Or else I would not have taken the research opportunity for the engineering Dept. of UC Long Beach, overseeing an experimental research component of the engineering dept. even though it's out of my field. I would not have patented a technology well over 40 years ahead of its time with collaborative research submitted to JPL in Pasadena.

Did you know out of China's educated population, almost 40% are going for engineering?

Want to know how many in the US go for engineering? 0.5% declared as an engineering major.

The numbers are actually slightly more for my field in Physics, at around 1.2%.

We are going so far backwards it's horrifying.

 

[Annie]

I'm certainly for educating our young. However cost-wise we have major problems. Certainly some of them are being addressed, painfully, at the pay and benefits level.

There are many more issues involved however. Off the top of my head, here are a few:

-schools have somehow been mandated to provide respite care for parents of children who are incapable of learning. While this may be something as a nation we feel these parents should have, it doesn't seem that schools are the best choice. I'm not addressing learning disabilities or the educable retarded, those fall within the purview of education. I'm referring to children that would be better cared for at home, with medical specialists.

-schools have been the point place to 'equalize' opportunities, both social and economic. It's not only failing, but it's dumbing down the curriculum. Not all students are capable or desirous of university studies. Attempting to provide a prep education for all, sets up failure for both the student and the schools. Much of the acting out we see from middle school through high school are behaviors of students in classes they are incapable of mastering or find otherwise irrelevant to their futures. We have schools for the gifted in academics and the arts, there should be schools designated to those who haven't any interests in academics beyond basic literacy and math.

-tracking works, nearly all those nations 'leading the scores' use it from the entrance to school.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Some in this country are fighting education. Especially science. Without an education, what kind of jobs will be available? Or don't people care?

I believe we would do better with more vocational traing during high school. Not everyone is a brainiac that is able to succeed at higher education.

I quite agree with this. I just Googled "jobs not enough skilled workers" and came up with pages and pages of examples from all over the country about the lack of skilled labor. There appears to be many jobs out there but they do not require and suit and tie. Our school district has a great Vo-Tech program as an alternate to the 'college route'. Much of college is over-rated, imo.