pknopp
Diamond Member
- Jul 22, 2019
- 73,695
- 28,783
- 2,210
You give up so soon?
There is nothing else to discuss.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You give up so soon?
Sure, there is.There is nothing else to discuss.
I did not dismiss it. It is a valid point. Public schools used to do the same. If a student came to school to disrupt school instead of learning, they were suspended. If they came back and did the same, they were suspended again. If a student assaulted a student or a teacher, they were expelled, and no one questioned the obvious need for that.
Students with disabilities were educated apart from their non-disabled peers, so they could learn what they could without hindering the education of others. Students who were too lazy to learn would fail, get left behind a grade or two, and realize that they aren't on the graduation track and drop out.
Schools were not twelve year warehousing institutions where at the end, you got a diploma whether you could read it or not.
So private schools can be the one-size-fits-all education nightmare that public school are?
How about we give one size voucher to typical students, one to gifted and talented, and a larger ones to students with disabilities or behavior issues that cost public schools more money. Then private schools seeking vouchers would tailor their services to different kinds of kids.
When was your teacher's certificate suspended? If not, it should have been. You support educational malpractice.I did not dismiss it. It is a valid point. Public schools used to do the same. If a student came to school to disrupt school instead of learning, they were suspended. If they came back and did the same, they were suspended again. If a student assaulted a student or a teacher, they were expelled, and no one questioned the obvious need for that.
Students with disabilities were educated apart from their non-disabled peers, so they could learn what they could without hindering the education of others. Students who were too lazy to learn would fail, get left behind a grade or two, and realize that they aren't on the graduation track and drop out.
Schools were not twelve year warehousing institutions where at the end, you got a diploma whether you could read it or not.
So private schools can be the one-size-fits-all education nightmare that public school are?
How about we give one size voucher to typical students, one to gifted and talented, and a larger ones to students with disabilities or behavior issues that cost public schools more money. Then private schools seeking vouchers would tailor their services to different kinds of kids.
The name of the program? Man, you are dumber than dirt!Ok, what is the name of the program and I will research it myself.
It is plain that you are hiding something about it.
Sure, there is.
You could say, "It was terrible that public schools used to expell students just for raping a classmate .......................
Same as today..... If a student came to school to disrupt school instead of learning, they were suspended. If they came back and did the same, they were suspended again. If a student assaulted a student or a teacher, they were expelled, ...
Same as today.... Students who were too lazy to learn would fail, get left behind a grade or two, and realize that they aren't on the graduation track and drop out.
...
You dont' know the difference between hyperbole and fact.I have zero interest in participating in your hyperbole.
Yes, I want to know the name of the voucher program that you claim Florida had.The name of the program? Man, you are dumber than dirt!
There was only one, dipshit!Yes, I want to know the name of the voucher program that you claim Florida had.
Becuase if I go research it, find one and tell you the flaws in it, you'll just say, "not that program, the other one."
Sure, there is.
You could say, "It was terrible that public schools used to expell students just for raping a classmate or assaulting a teacher. It is much better that they student be secretly moved to another school in the district and continue to have access to the girls bathroom by wearing a skirt."
Then we could discuss that.
Are you sure you're not making this up, or it was just something that you "read somewhere?"There was only one, dipshit!
As so often, our tort system puts schools in a position in they can be sued no matter what they do. Option A, and one greedy trial lawyer will want to cash in, Option B, and another greedy trial lawyer will cash in. On the weekend, they will play golf together with the greedy politician and the greedy lobbyist that make their legalized theivery possible.Last week. A teacher told our admin, "I will not be hit by this child one more time. Not one more time."
SHE was reprimanded. I repeat. SHE was reprimanded. For saying this.
When I relayed the story to a family member in business, she said with wide eyes, "Your school is going to be sued. Badly. So badly."
Right. I know. But here we are in 2022, when there is no common sense, reason, or rationality at all.
I don't care about "conservative" versus "Liberal," as those have become meaningless terms.And yes slavery and segregation were CONSERVATIVE policies. That you come up with "all Democratic policies" shows that you're not really interested in proper debate.
Yes, it's vague because it's a huge subject and I don't claim to have all the answers. It's a discussion for a country to have. The answer of "What should an American adult be like?"
For example - law abiding, having skills to get a job, a good parent, a good spouse.
Then, how do we achieve this?
And again, another jibe. You teach behavior, and yet you come on here and you're full of crap.
I can't be bothered to be honest.
Yes, our two party system leads to non sensible government, and I also wish we had proportional representation.Yes, debates should happen. However in the US with a two party system and these two parties being exceedingly negative, and using narratives to try and force people to accept their policies, rather than having people dictating what the politicians do, as happens in many proportional representation countries.
Take Germany. The AfD appeared in 2013, it's a further right party (not far right, but further to the right than the CDU, the traditional right party). By 2017 they had gained 12.6% of the vote and 90 seats. They took votes and seats from the CDU. That was an instant impact.
In the UK, with FPTP, UKIP, a similar type party formed in the early 1990s, managed to get 12.6% of the vote in 2015. They got one seat. They did change politics, because they forced a Brexit vote, but then they virtually died.
In Germany the people have a much faster way of getting heard and if the politicians don't listen, they lose and lose big time.
In the US there isn't even a chance that third parties like UKIP will get voted for, which means no one listens. Which means the two parties can control their narratives. Which makes for crazy politics and a lack of open debate without being called a "racist" "communist" "fascist" etc etc.
If you are competing with people, and you have one interviewee who has the skills, and another who can read and write and do basic math, which one will get the job? If an employer has to train their employees to do things they should have learned at school, the US will be less efficient and foreign employees will be more sought after.
Yes, parents are the primary teachers of how to become parents. And you get cycles of it failing. Once one parent fails, the whole stack of card fails for generations. And the numbers failing just grow and grow, especially as such people are far more likely to produce more kids.
Well, I'd say that people become more radical when sensible doesn't happen.
If you have a government that is sensible, people will see that sensible doesn't work. When governments are wacky, like in the US, people see the normal system isn't working so they go much further left or right.
We can see this on both sides of the party. The Dems are moving left, the Reps moving right.
Spain is an example of what happens when this is the situation. Civil War in the 1930s, or Weimar Germany, pre-Soviet Russia, many examples.
Either the US introduces a sensible electoral system (proportional representation) or the left and right become more radical and more wacky shit happens.
I don't care about "conservative" versus "Liberal," as those have become meaningless terms.
There is one party that promotes programs that lead to massive inflation, economic stagnation, reduction of respect for the U.S. and division among citizens of the U.S. I oppose that party, and the GOP is the only organization capable of stopping that party, flawed as the Republicans are.
Yes, our two party system leads to non sensible government, and I also wish we had proportional representation.
But the Democrats seem determined to make it into a one-party system. A one-party system would not be twice as bad as a two-party system, it would be many, many times worse.
No, you should not say "Republican" when speaking of a Party in the UK. The UK takes some pride in not being a republic. There is a movement called "Republic," which is a republican movement with a small L. I don't know if they'll ever get traction.You think the Democrats are all about "massive inflation" do you?
Inflation Rate - By Country
The US has 7.7% inflation.
The UK, a country with a conservative government (should I say Republican as "conservative" is meaningless?) for the last 12 years, has an inflation rate of 11.1.
Of course Trump was responsible for the highest post-war unemployment rate, and that after having achieved the lowest unemployment rate for people of color in history.Then again inflation is everywhere, Switzerland and Lichtenstein are low at 3%, France at 6.2, Luxembourg at 6.9 along with Canada, New Zealand at 7.2, Spain Australia at 7.3, but they're close to the US's figures.
Biden didn't make the inflation. The inflation would have happened regardless.
It's like saying Trump was responsible for the HIGHEST post was unemployment rate. He wasn't, but it happened on his watch.
An interesting point about offshoots.Democrats AND Republicans are making it a one party system. The reality is the Dems and Reps are too big to be "one party" or a united party. The Dems and Reps don't stand for one thing. The Republicans especially are seeing offshoots of the party, the Tea Party, Trump etc.
I used to say that also. The Democrats and the Republicans would each adjust their policies toward the middle, to attract undecided voters. When conservatism became popular, Bill Clinton ran as more conservative than George W., and he won. While the parties have indeed started to blend, that competition for the undecided has at least kept either from going off the deep end.Essentially the US has one party, the Demublicans or whatever you want to call them. They win EVERYTHING, it's like a dodgy dictatorship.
No, you should not say "Republican" when speaking of a Party in the UK. The UK takes some pride in not being a republic. There is a movement called "Republic," which is a republican movement with a small L. I don't know if they'll ever get traction.
I don't know what it means to be "Conservative" in the UK, and I don't like what it means in the US.
Of course Trump was responsible for the highest post-war unemployment rate, and that after having achieved the lowest unemployment rate for people of color in history.
He allowed himself to be scammed by Fauci and his followers to the point that he became just another follower. He listened to the shreiking voices of the most radical of Democrats who seized on the pandemic to push the concepts of individual rights off the table.
The shutdowns were disastrous for our economy. The only reason I still vote for him is that no other prominent politician advated against Fauci-ism. I'd vote Libertarian, except that it is vital not to let the Democrats have enough power to realize their dream of a one-party system.
Sweden decided early on not to get caught up in the fake pandemic by participating in the pandemic of fear. Their economy suffered few ill effects, and their health outcomes were on par with all the mask up/shut down nations.
An interesting point about offshoots.
Trump originally ran as essentially a third party candidate in Republican clothing. He co-opted the party aparatus and defeated each of the established candidates badly. The only person who might have had a chance to win the nomination against him would have been a "generic non-Trump Republican. We'll never know if such a person would have won, because no Republican was willing to to step down and support another until their campaigns became hopeless.
He was an outsider, but Trump is not now an offshoot of the Rebublican Party, Trump is the leader of the Party selected by its voters. The Liz Cheney/Mitch McConnel/Mitt Romney faction may need to form their own offshoot. They are doing nothing to appeal to Trump voters, and certainly not declaring against him in the primary.
Barring a Republican willing to stand up to Trump, he will win the primary unopposed as he did in 2020. I'd like your take on who in your party can defeat him?
I used to say that also. The Democrats and the Republicans would each adjust their policies toward the middle, to attract undecided voters. When conservatism became popular, Bill Clinton ran as more conservative than George W., and he won. While the parties have indeed started to blend, that competition for the undecided has at least kept either from going off the deep end.
What threatens that is the Democrats refusal to accept tightening of election security. With no election security and with Democrats at all levels being so willing to cheat, we now have the possibility of Democrats being able to run the most radical among them and win anyway. Once they realize their dream of not being reliant on voters, they will be free to realize also their most excessive policy goals.
I'm not, I'm libertarian as an ideal, but Trump's policies have not been geared to be conservative or liberal, rather to put America first and improve the lives of Americans. Until that unlikely libertarian ideal is achieved, I support American first, secure borders, economic growth and tarrifs to prevent American consumers from being available to foreign countries but their consumers not available to our manufacturers, and a return of our troops from foreign lands.Of course I shouldn't say Republican, the reality is I was showing you that "conservative" and "liberal" are very useful words.
You don't like what "conservative" means in the US? But it is what it is, and you seem to be a conservative.
So, it is never the president, except for the God-like Obama? Obama handed Trump a mess which Trump was well on the way to fixing. Not just the economy, but the border, and foreign relations. Biden has been a disaster for all of those, and crime has skyrocketed. He isn't personally responsible for the crimes in Portland, New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, etc. But it is the Democratic method of solving crime by defunding police and releasing criminals that has caused it.Could Trump have done anything to stop there being the highest unemployment rate? No. The people will blame someone or other, without ever taking any responsibility, but it was out of Trump's hand. And the same for "people of color" low unemployment. Had Trump want in 2008, he'd not have had low unemployment. Obama saw the economy out of the mess.
Then stop stressing about who is president.The reality though is that the president of the USA often can have a negative impact but not much of a positive impact. Like a ship's captain, sailing the seas. They get to port intact, job well done, but mostly because of the weather, and some because of the ship building etc etc.
Your thirty second google search doesn't convince me that the information I found while monitoring Sweden's progress after they announced that they would not be going along with the pandemic craziness is now invalid.Sweden had high unemployment, they got above 10%. You really should research things before posting them. Why? Because then you learn things, you don't wait for others to teach you. It's one of the reasons I come on this forum, it gives me the impetus to go research. Took me 30 seconds to find that.Sweden Unemployment Rate
Unemployment Rate in Sweden decreased to 7.70 percent in July from 9.40 percent in June of 2024. This page provides the latest reported value for - Sweden Unemployment Rate - plus previous releases, historical high and low, short-term forecast and long-term prediction, economic calendar, survey...tradingeconomics.com
Maybe.Trump is product of the Koch brothers, ironically because they hate him (or at least one does, as the other is dead). The Tea Party was a Koch brothers funded group. Trump jumped on top of the craziness that the Koch brothers have created and made it his own. Without the Koch brothers, Trump would never have been president.
Be specific. Where are we going and why is it bad?And it shows the direction the country is going in. And it's all bad.
Trump defeating himself seems unlikely. BUt a generic Republican beating him is extremely unlikely, because our primaries don't work that way.I don't know who can defeat Trump, I don't tend to pay much attention to who could, I wait and see what happens, it's just what interests me most. Trump might end up defeating himself. Who knows?
The problem is that if the Republicans (and a large number of Democrats) are wrong about cheating influencing elections, then it just means that we will only have confidence when Republicans win, which is not fair to the Democrats (if the majority of Americans are wrong about cheating).Democrats and Republicans run on negative emotions. They attack each other. The Republicans say it's all about electoral fraud, Democrats don't believe it and the people in the middle will make their decisions on which negativity they believe the most.
Agreed.It's a pretty bad way to elect a government, based on which party is the least disastrous and shit.
I'm not, I'm libertarian as an ideal, but Trump's policies have not been geared to be conservative or liberal, rather to put America first and improve the lives of Americans. Until that unlikely libertarian ideal is achieved, I support American first, secure borders, economic growth and tarrifs to prevent American consumers from being available to foreign countries but their consumers not available to our manufacturers, and a return of our troops from foreign lands.
Trump was doing that, with some success, until the panicdemic.
So, it is never the president, except for the God-like Obama? Obama handed Trump a mess which Trump was well on the way to fixing. Not just the economy, but the border, and foreign relations. Biden has been a disaster for all of those, and crime has skyrocketed. He isn't personally responsible for the crimes in Portland, New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, etc. But it is the Democratic method of solving crime by defunding police and releasing criminals that has caused it.
Then stop stressing about who is president.
Your thirty second google search doesn't convince me that the information I found while monitoring Sweden's progress after they announced that they would not be going along with the pandemic craziness is now invalid.
Here are a couple of places that you can start if you are willing to spend more than thirty seconds googling and cherry picking.
UPDATE 2-Swedish economy surpasses pre-pandemic size, economists say
* Sweden imposed few restrictions during pandemic (Recasts on size of economy, add fresh economist comment)www.reuters.com
* Swedish GDP +0.9% in Q2 - preliminary figures
* Reuters poll had forecast 0.7% growth
* Sweden imposed few restrictions during pandemic (Recasts on size of economy, add fresh economist comment)
STOCKHOLM, July 29 (Reuters) - Sweden’s economy looks to have recovered all of the losses wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic, economists said, after preliminary figures released on Thursday showed the country was at the forefront of the economic rebound.
While its economy shrank 2.8% in 2020 when the pandemic first hit, Sweden was not hit as hard as many other countries thanks in part to less onerous COVID-19 rules which allowed most businesses to stay open.
Economic measures on account of the pandemic 2020–2021
Since the infection started to spread, the Government and the Riksdag have taken a large number of measures to safeguard people’s lives, health and...www.government.se
The IMF’s most recent estimate of countries’ financial support measures suggests that Sweden’s measures are well in line with those of several comparable countries, chiefly with other Nordic countries. The Swedish economy coped much better than that of many other European countries in 2020 and, so far, its recovery has been faster. In the second quarter of 2021 the Swedish GDP was back at the same level as before the pandemic (see figure 1.3). In the other Nordic countries activity in the economy has also been maintained relatively well.
Maybe.
Without Rush Limbaugh, maybe W. Bush would not have been president. Without Carter's honest but bizarrely incompentent presidency, maybe Reagan would have never been president. Without Nixon's criminality, maybe the honest but utterly incapable Carter would never have been elected. current events influence future events.
Just out of curiosity, what was crazy about the TEA Party? Please be specific about which crazy policies they advocated. Avoid ad hominem attacks, if you please.
Be specific. Where are we going and why is it bad?
Trump defeating himself seems unlikely. BUt a generic Republican beating him is extremely unlikely, because our primaries don't work that way.
My understanding of UK politics is very limited, so I apologize in advance if I get this wrong: Do they vote for the party and then the party selects the government, either by itself, or in coalition with another party if they only win a plurality?
If we had that here, and people could just vote for "Republican," instead of for an actual Trump opponent, maybe. Maybe . . . but the Party would have to pull a fast one on the voters by installing another leader after Trump voters went out and voted Republican.
The problem is that if the Republicans (and a large number of Democrats) are wrong about cheating influencing elections, then it just means that we will only have confidence when Republicans win, which is not fair to the Democrats (if the majority of Americans are wrong about cheating).
Democracy would still work and we would see the cycle of one party winning, then the other until it became clear that the Democrats don't have a lock by their cheating.
However . . . if the majority are right about cheating, then left unaddressed, the election security weaknesses will allow Democrats to win elections without compromising with the Republicans, and without needing to care that their worst excesses will offend even Democrat voters.
Voting will be meaningless.
Agreed.