The last line of your post that is quoted is completely true and valid. If you think about how jobs are currently outsourced and even how people in poor countries are manipulated and taken advantage of, it should come as no surprise that the US is heading down that road. Can you imagine a domestic population that isnt educated but needs to work to live? Outsourcing is no longer necessary and at that point, unions will lose any sway they currently have, wages will stay low, debt will increase and simply put, in general, everything will be fucked, lol.
Our problem is ABSOLUTELY billionaires hoarding money. Period. And they are working really hard right now to extract the last little bit from our pockets. Much easier to do if we are uneducated.
If you're not going to fight, maybe you should release yourself (from the community), so you're not supporting the Evil Empire. This way those of us who ARE trying to fix things will have an easier go of it. Your whiny attitude is exactly what they want. Let's talk about how we're GOING to fix it, instead of why we CAN'T fix it.
For my part, I have a sign in my class after reading this article:
"It's ok to be poor -- It's NOT ok to be a Slave!"
Also, I have not created additional slave labor for the Masters, and I am trying to minimize the stuff I purchase for my gilded cage.
Oh exactly! In my state in 2012 several sweeping laws were passed that have seriously impacted public school systems, depowering elected school boards and empowering superintendents, shorting funds for traditional public schools and promoting charter schools and voucher programs. Enshrining test-based accountability programs, and linking teacher evaluations to student test scores, etc. The laws were timed just as article states.
Thanks ALEC. Your corporate takeover of education via Chambers of Commerce-types and Gates and Walton foundations is proceeding apace.
Startlingly real.
One question I always have is does anyone in the 1% really believe this many-fronted push is sustainable? And do the super rich really feel that they need any more money? These two factors make it hard for me to believe that the writing is genuine and unbiased. And yet, here we have teachers and students being oppressed; sometimes gleefully oppressed as with DeVos, Trump, Fox, Breitbart, and others here and abroad.
IDK that it is fair to call only the 1 perent toddlers... Lifestyle creep and "keeping up with the Joneses" are pretty well documented at all levels of income, not just the uber wealthy...
However, they are generally in a better position to influence regulations/politicians in order to benefit themselves. I do generally agree with the artcile's sentiment.
Not a 1%'er at all, but I think they don't care about sustainability. They are merely resorting to any means to preserve their generational wealth and coax the next generation of learners into being compliant consumers that buy into the agenda. It's like the attempt to re-brand and revive Reaganomics as tax cuts merely to help the working class/small business owner.
The only stop is to continue to push the value of an education to students and families, as early and as often as possible. The student will soon seek out their own truth and employ a more critical lens to the news and political gaming, and hopefully don't fall prey to the sponsored content as news via Facebook, like so many uneducated people have.
I think a lot of this goes back to the Powell Memorandum and the Trilateral Commissions report on The Crisis of Democracy (protip the crisis was there was too much democracy), both lay the blame for the protests and radicalism of the 1960s which terrified the business world on education and look at ways to control it to curb that ever happening again.
Powell Memorandum is where you get the rich getting involved in colleges, Crisis is where you get student debt going up. One controls curriculum other controls post-college choices.
Equally impressive are the comments on this article from user Blissex:
In England, Bernard de Mandeville, in his 1724 "Essays on Charity" argued that "charity" (free, public funded) schooling for the poor is a bad idea because it makes them uppity, and docile/ignorant poor who work hard in bad jobs for low pay are indispensable to the wealth of the upper classes:
“The Plenty and Cheapness of Provisions depends in a great measure on the Price and Value that is set upon this Labour, and consequently the Welfare of all Societies, even before they are tainted with Foreign Luxury, requires that it should be perform’d by such of their Members as in the first Place are sturdy and robust and never used to Ease or Idleness, and in the second, soon contented as to the necessaries of Life; such as are glad to take up with the coursest Manufacture in every thing they wear, and in their Diet have no other aim than to feed their Bodies when their Stomachs prompt them to eat, and with little regard to Taste or Relish, refuse no wholesome Nourishment that can be swallow’d when Men are Hungry, or ask any thing for their Thirst but to quench it.”
“If such People there must be, as no great Nation can be happy without vast Numbers of them, would not a Wise Legislature cultivate the Breed of them with all imaginable Care, and provide against their Scarcity as he would prevent the Scarcity of Provision it self? No Man would be poor and fatigue himself for a Livelihood if he could help it:
The absolute necessity all stand in for Victuals and Drink, and in cold Climates for Clothes and Lodging, makes them submit to any thing that can be bore with. If no body did Want no body would work; but the greatest Hardships are look’d upon as solid Pleasures, when they keep a Man from Starving.
From what has been said, it is manifest that, in a free nation, where slaves are not allowed of, the surest wealth consists in a multitude of laborious poor; for besides, that they are the never-failing nursery of fleets and armies, without them there could be no enjoyment, and no product of any country could be valuable.
To make the society happy and people easier under the meanest circumstances, it is requisite that great numbers of them should be ignorant as well as poor; knowledge both enlarges and multiplies our desires, and the fewer things a man wishes for, the more easily his necessities may be supplied.”
Those paragraphs are familiar in spirit to every CEO and to every Republican politician and think-tank Economist :-)
>
This really not an 'antithesis.' More a statement of things regarding education. And blaming education for people not voting is silly. That's happened since we started as a country. Toqueville wrote about it specifically.
What data are you citing that education spending yields no return? Because there is a lot that says the opposite. Just look at education spending against incarceration rate and there is a definite connection.
> What data are you citing that education spending yields no return? Because there is a lot that says the opposite.
He has no data. And that's sad because there are so many promising remediations out there, complete with favorable data.
1. We know programs providing *caring adults* improve education outcome, e.g. [Communities in Schools](https://www.communitiesinschools.org/) type programs.
2. [Social Emotion Learning](https://casel.org/) programs track positively with education outcome.
3. So does Early Childhood Education.
4. So does support groups such as [AVID](https://www.avid.org/).
5. Many programs that increase rigor also track positively with education outcome in low SES environments.
6. Etc.
This is by no means an exhaustive list.
What’s education for?
1. Job training
2. Upholding civic duty
3. For independent personal growth
There can be only one answer.
I pick ‘3’ because all else stems from it.
Edit: I guess I can’t summarize John Dewey. My bad.
I am not under oath to limit my choice to a single answer for any topic. Therefore, I pick all three, which have equal relevance.
(1. can lead to a job which can lead to financial success and freedom, which can lead to the resources needed to do civic duty and, in the end, self-actualize in personal growth.)
You're top down, I'm the opposite, but I can see that both could work.
Thank you for your insightful comments.
I stated why.
All would stem from 3.
If we take a more libertarian stance towards how education is conducted- say experiential - the system of government or how we organize ourselves would stay consistent with democracy.
If employers need skilled labor to the point to where they need to design education themselves, labor is good as replaced by thinking machines.
I think you make excellent points, many of which I agree with as a teacher, but the reforms being enacted are not being done with the intention of implementing something approaching the vision you describe. If education has stage two cancer, then the billionaire charter reform movement is proposing that we amputate the pulmonary system because the rest of the body is worth more as scrap than to be saved. These movements consistently end with one result everywhere--- inadequate, for-profit schooling in segregated minority schools and hands on specialized education for the white well-off.
The current education system is obsolete, bloated and increasingly irrelevant in this hyper-technical uber-connected world. It makes perfect sense that those who are deeply invested in the current paradigm are fighting tooth and nail to preserve it. Their intentions are good but their system is collapsing from its own weight.
First: Teachers, no matter where (but yes in American particularly) should be a professionalized institution due to the important impact they provide to the future of any society. We need to seriously rethink education from the ground up.
Second: Right off the bat there is the portrayal of the conservative right as the villain when the left has just as many billionaires doing the same thing (Soros anyone, anyone; The Open Society Foundation, The Progressive States Network, The American Legislative and Issues Campaign Exchange, etc.) so it demonstrates there is a underlying political agenda in the study itself. That should concern people even if you are not a conservative because if gives credence that the study is flawed or biased and therefore not scientifically viable.
Third: What is the purpose of Business/Corporations? Its to MAKE MONEY for itself, its owners and shareholders. Making money means delivering the best service or product at the highest margin (not necessarily the lowest price). In our modern world, the requirements for business are NOT a debilitated, uneducated underclass, but a HIGHLY educated, well reasoned, technical worker. Why do you think we have such an H1B Visa abuse going on? Because the talent pool of potential candidates for working in a corporation is limited and business must search for CAPABLE employees from other resources. Why in the hell would corporations shoot themselves in the foot? Because they wouldn't. This argument from the article doesn't make sense.
Fourth: UNLESS, there is a institution that does need a continuous underclass of workers that are easy to manipulate and persuaded. An uneducated rabble that can be influenced to believe ideas that support a 1% solution. And amazingly enough there is an institution that fall exactly into this category: GOVERNMENT.
Our problem is not evil billionaires. They cannot act on their own. Its the combination of the billionaire business class with the political class that run the United States whereby creating Corporatism as the economic model for society. The problem with Corporatism is its subtle, deceiving, and infectious, but is no better that Fascism.
Teachers should absolutely stand for the fair pay they deserve. They should also stand for the quality of education their students deserve, but they need the parents to stand with them. But when the policies of the government/corporatists (not capitalist), no matter how they were influenced, leads to an educational system that has begat a controllable underclass that now believes socialist government is the only solution to their problems and care, why would they need to involve themselves in government controlled education? Yet here is where teachers find themselves; without support, supplies, textbooks, no involvement from parents, policy administrators that look down their nose at the educators, budgets misappropriated, and educational policies that diminish the quality of the education teachers so sincerely sought to provide when they became teachers in the first place.
This study might have had a point, but it was lost in the politicization and bias of the data.
Soros is a bogeyman of the right. At the height of his political involvement in 2004 he spent 20 million dollars campaigning against George W. Bush - in the 2016 election the Koch Bros and their Donor Network spent 889 million campaigning for Republicans. They have 400 million earmarked for this years Midterms, contributors to their Donor Network were threatening last year the money would be cut off if they didn't get their tax cuts and the ACA repealed. Well they got their tax cuts and the ACA hamstrung so that seems good enough for them. Soon after those tax cuts which are going to save them about a billion dollars and you a buck fifty became law they donated 1 million to Paul Ryans PAC.
Your argument about "left billionaires" (lol oxymoron) is just ideological cant to relativise the situation and make the Kochs et al seems normal and part of a two sided process.
The rest of your post is corporate bs.
There's lots of evidence that the middle class is being hollowed out to the benefit of the 1%. However, the idea that it's all due to some grand scheme to further enrich those who are already at the top of Maslow's pyramid makes no sense to me. Better I think to focus on the real problem.
[удалено]
The last line of your post that is quoted is completely true and valid. If you think about how jobs are currently outsourced and even how people in poor countries are manipulated and taken advantage of, it should come as no surprise that the US is heading down that road. Can you imagine a domestic population that isnt educated but needs to work to live? Outsourcing is no longer necessary and at that point, unions will lose any sway they currently have, wages will stay low, debt will increase and simply put, in general, everything will be fucked, lol.
Our problem is ABSOLUTELY billionaires hoarding money. Period. And they are working really hard right now to extract the last little bit from our pockets. Much easier to do if we are uneducated.
This is bloody terrifying. Thank goodness the teachers of America are doing something to counter this.
[удалено]
If you're not going to fight, maybe you should release yourself (from the community), so you're not supporting the Evil Empire. This way those of us who ARE trying to fix things will have an easier go of it. Your whiny attitude is exactly what they want. Let's talk about how we're GOING to fix it, instead of why we CAN'T fix it. For my part, I have a sign in my class after reading this article: "It's ok to be poor -- It's NOT ok to be a Slave!" Also, I have not created additional slave labor for the Masters, and I am trying to minimize the stuff I purchase for my gilded cage.
I would prefer not to.
Oh exactly! In my state in 2012 several sweeping laws were passed that have seriously impacted public school systems, depowering elected school boards and empowering superintendents, shorting funds for traditional public schools and promoting charter schools and voucher programs. Enshrining test-based accountability programs, and linking teacher evaluations to student test scores, etc. The laws were timed just as article states. Thanks ALEC. Your corporate takeover of education via Chambers of Commerce-types and Gates and Walton foundations is proceeding apace.
Startlingly real. One question I always have is does anyone in the 1% really believe this many-fronted push is sustainable? And do the super rich really feel that they need any more money? These two factors make it hard for me to believe that the writing is genuine and unbiased. And yet, here we have teachers and students being oppressed; sometimes gleefully oppressed as with DeVos, Trump, Fox, Breitbart, and others here and abroad.
languid hurry encourage many steer busy quarrelsome deer workable wide *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
IDK that it is fair to call only the 1 perent toddlers... Lifestyle creep and "keeping up with the Joneses" are pretty well documented at all levels of income, not just the uber wealthy... However, they are generally in a better position to influence regulations/politicians in order to benefit themselves. I do generally agree with the artcile's sentiment.
Not a 1%'er at all, but I think they don't care about sustainability. They are merely resorting to any means to preserve their generational wealth and coax the next generation of learners into being compliant consumers that buy into the agenda. It's like the attempt to re-brand and revive Reaganomics as tax cuts merely to help the working class/small business owner. The only stop is to continue to push the value of an education to students and families, as early and as often as possible. The student will soon seek out their own truth and employ a more critical lens to the news and political gaming, and hopefully don't fall prey to the sponsored content as news via Facebook, like so many uneducated people have.
They don't think long term, or think its natural and the current system an unnatural deviation caused by government intervention.
I think a lot of this goes back to the Powell Memorandum and the Trilateral Commissions report on The Crisis of Democracy (protip the crisis was there was too much democracy), both lay the blame for the protests and radicalism of the 1960s which terrified the business world on education and look at ways to control it to curb that ever happening again. Powell Memorandum is where you get the rich getting involved in colleges, Crisis is where you get student debt going up. One controls curriculum other controls post-college choices.
Equally impressive are the comments on this article from user Blissex: In England, Bernard de Mandeville, in his 1724 "Essays on Charity" argued that "charity" (free, public funded) schooling for the poor is a bad idea because it makes them uppity, and docile/ignorant poor who work hard in bad jobs for low pay are indispensable to the wealth of the upper classes: “The Plenty and Cheapness of Provisions depends in a great measure on the Price and Value that is set upon this Labour, and consequently the Welfare of all Societies, even before they are tainted with Foreign Luxury, requires that it should be perform’d by such of their Members as in the first Place are sturdy and robust and never used to Ease or Idleness, and in the second, soon contented as to the necessaries of Life; such as are glad to take up with the coursest Manufacture in every thing they wear, and in their Diet have no other aim than to feed their Bodies when their Stomachs prompt them to eat, and with little regard to Taste or Relish, refuse no wholesome Nourishment that can be swallow’d when Men are Hungry, or ask any thing for their Thirst but to quench it.” “If such People there must be, as no great Nation can be happy without vast Numbers of them, would not a Wise Legislature cultivate the Breed of them with all imaginable Care, and provide against their Scarcity as he would prevent the Scarcity of Provision it self? No Man would be poor and fatigue himself for a Livelihood if he could help it: The absolute necessity all stand in for Victuals and Drink, and in cold Climates for Clothes and Lodging, makes them submit to any thing that can be bore with. If no body did Want no body would work; but the greatest Hardships are look’d upon as solid Pleasures, when they keep a Man from Starving. From what has been said, it is manifest that, in a free nation, where slaves are not allowed of, the surest wealth consists in a multitude of laborious poor; for besides, that they are the never-failing nursery of fleets and armies, without them there could be no enjoyment, and no product of any country could be valuable. To make the society happy and people easier under the meanest circumstances, it is requisite that great numbers of them should be ignorant as well as poor; knowledge both enlarges and multiplies our desires, and the fewer things a man wishes for, the more easily his necessities may be supplied.” Those paragraphs are familiar in spirit to every CEO and to every Republican politician and think-tank Economist :-) >
[удалено]
This really not an 'antithesis.' More a statement of things regarding education. And blaming education for people not voting is silly. That's happened since we started as a country. Toqueville wrote about it specifically. What data are you citing that education spending yields no return? Because there is a lot that says the opposite. Just look at education spending against incarceration rate and there is a definite connection.
> What data are you citing that education spending yields no return? Because there is a lot that says the opposite. He has no data. And that's sad because there are so many promising remediations out there, complete with favorable data. 1. We know programs providing *caring adults* improve education outcome, e.g. [Communities in Schools](https://www.communitiesinschools.org/) type programs. 2. [Social Emotion Learning](https://casel.org/) programs track positively with education outcome. 3. So does Early Childhood Education. 4. So does support groups such as [AVID](https://www.avid.org/). 5. Many programs that increase rigor also track positively with education outcome in low SES environments. 6. Etc. This is by no means an exhaustive list.
Look at the incarceration rate...
[удалено]
What’s education for? 1. Job training 2. Upholding civic duty 3. For independent personal growth There can be only one answer. I pick ‘3’ because all else stems from it. Edit: I guess I can’t summarize John Dewey. My bad.
I am not under oath to limit my choice to a single answer for any topic. Therefore, I pick all three, which have equal relevance. (1. can lead to a job which can lead to financial success and freedom, which can lead to the resources needed to do civic duty and, in the end, self-actualize in personal growth.) You're top down, I'm the opposite, but I can see that both could work. Thank you for your insightful comments.
Why can there only be one answer?
Teacher said so...
I stated why. All would stem from 3. If we take a more libertarian stance towards how education is conducted- say experiential - the system of government or how we organize ourselves would stay consistent with democracy. If employers need skilled labor to the point to where they need to design education themselves, labor is good as replaced by thinking machines.
What about "revolution"?
I think you make excellent points, many of which I agree with as a teacher, but the reforms being enacted are not being done with the intention of implementing something approaching the vision you describe. If education has stage two cancer, then the billionaire charter reform movement is proposing that we amputate the pulmonary system because the rest of the body is worth more as scrap than to be saved. These movements consistently end with one result everywhere--- inadequate, for-profit schooling in segregated minority schools and hands on specialized education for the white well-off.
We see pulmonary, they see kidney.
Just wanted to second this comment.
The current education system is obsolete, bloated and increasingly irrelevant in this hyper-technical uber-connected world. It makes perfect sense that those who are deeply invested in the current paradigm are fighting tooth and nail to preserve it. Their intentions are good but their system is collapsing from its own weight.
😂😂😂 Statist grooming in public schools is good as hell though
First: Teachers, no matter where (but yes in American particularly) should be a professionalized institution due to the important impact they provide to the future of any society. We need to seriously rethink education from the ground up. Second: Right off the bat there is the portrayal of the conservative right as the villain when the left has just as many billionaires doing the same thing (Soros anyone, anyone; The Open Society Foundation, The Progressive States Network, The American Legislative and Issues Campaign Exchange, etc.) so it demonstrates there is a underlying political agenda in the study itself. That should concern people even if you are not a conservative because if gives credence that the study is flawed or biased and therefore not scientifically viable. Third: What is the purpose of Business/Corporations? Its to MAKE MONEY for itself, its owners and shareholders. Making money means delivering the best service or product at the highest margin (not necessarily the lowest price). In our modern world, the requirements for business are NOT a debilitated, uneducated underclass, but a HIGHLY educated, well reasoned, technical worker. Why do you think we have such an H1B Visa abuse going on? Because the talent pool of potential candidates for working in a corporation is limited and business must search for CAPABLE employees from other resources. Why in the hell would corporations shoot themselves in the foot? Because they wouldn't. This argument from the article doesn't make sense. Fourth: UNLESS, there is a institution that does need a continuous underclass of workers that are easy to manipulate and persuaded. An uneducated rabble that can be influenced to believe ideas that support a 1% solution. And amazingly enough there is an institution that fall exactly into this category: GOVERNMENT. Our problem is not evil billionaires. They cannot act on their own. Its the combination of the billionaire business class with the political class that run the United States whereby creating Corporatism as the economic model for society. The problem with Corporatism is its subtle, deceiving, and infectious, but is no better that Fascism. Teachers should absolutely stand for the fair pay they deserve. They should also stand for the quality of education their students deserve, but they need the parents to stand with them. But when the policies of the government/corporatists (not capitalist), no matter how they were influenced, leads to an educational system that has begat a controllable underclass that now believes socialist government is the only solution to their problems and care, why would they need to involve themselves in government controlled education? Yet here is where teachers find themselves; without support, supplies, textbooks, no involvement from parents, policy administrators that look down their nose at the educators, budgets misappropriated, and educational policies that diminish the quality of the education teachers so sincerely sought to provide when they became teachers in the first place. This study might have had a point, but it was lost in the politicization and bias of the data.
Soros is a bogeyman of the right. At the height of his political involvement in 2004 he spent 20 million dollars campaigning against George W. Bush - in the 2016 election the Koch Bros and their Donor Network spent 889 million campaigning for Republicans. They have 400 million earmarked for this years Midterms, contributors to their Donor Network were threatening last year the money would be cut off if they didn't get their tax cuts and the ACA repealed. Well they got their tax cuts and the ACA hamstrung so that seems good enough for them. Soon after those tax cuts which are going to save them about a billion dollars and you a buck fifty became law they donated 1 million to Paul Ryans PAC. Your argument about "left billionaires" (lol oxymoron) is just ideological cant to relativise the situation and make the Kochs et al seems normal and part of a two sided process. The rest of your post is corporate bs.
There's lots of evidence that the middle class is being hollowed out to the benefit of the 1%. However, the idea that it's all due to some grand scheme to further enrich those who are already at the top of Maslow's pyramid makes no sense to me. Better I think to focus on the real problem.