NationStates

Saiwania wrote:https://boingboing.net/2018/02/07/this-is-not-ok.html
https://www.economist.com/news/united-s ... ats-matter

One score and six years ago, Oklahoma passed this stupid law requiring a 75%+ majority in their state assembly to raise taxes, effectively making any tax cut that passes- permanent. The legislature of that state had an addiction for cutting taxes to give out corporate welfare to fossil fuel interests and to dabble in some "trickle down" supply side nonsense just as Kansas has done, and predictably- Oklahoma's government is now all out of money.

Oklahoma's K-12 teachers haven't received a pay raise in over a decade and is now 3rd worst in compensation for the entire US. That state can now only afford to pay said teachers by switching to a 4 day school week in 90+ districts, so teachers can work at Walmart to be able to pay rent.

Most teachers understandably, aren't finding these conditions to be acceptable- and are now fleeing the state in droves for better opportunities in neighboring or "better off" states such as Texas or Arkansas. The health insurance situation for Oklahoma teachers leaves much to be desired as well, because many of the plans under their "private" system are more expensive than what teachers are getting paid in salary.

It gets worse, Oklahoma's highway patrol isn't filling their gas tanks to full capacity to "help their state's cash flow." Drunk drivers are being ignored or let go because there isn't anyone to process their tickets anymore, and the state's prison system is nearing collapse. Many inmates will have to be released prematurely, there just aren't any funds left to keep most of them imprisoned.

With essential government services declining to such a steep extent, private businesses are leaving Oklahoma as well. The poorer Oklahoma becomes and the smaller that state's economy gets, the less appeal there is to "set up shop" there or to stick around. It is quite a pitiful state of affairs that is currently unfolding. It looks as if the state is dying just as Kansas was under Sam Brownback's stewardship.

What are your thoughts on this tragic situation? What in your opinion, is the best solution to fixing Oklahoma's problems to effectively turn that state around? Are the results of the policies followed in Oklahoma, further evidence of a massive, catastrophic, colossal failure of the Republican party's economic platform?

Petrasylvania wrote:How about if we merge Oklahoma and Kansas into a single country called Ancappistan?

Kernen wrote:

Salandriagado wrote:
If you really thought this way, you'd be living somewhere in rural Africa. Evidently the people around you being well educated is beneficial to you.

I have no idea why you think I need to go to a foreign country to find a high demand for my expertise.

Farnhamia wrote:

Post War America wrote:
That right there is a societal failing. The notion of individual prestige over civic responsibility. You have managed to single handedly describe and give voice to basically the root of most problems in the United States today.

I blame Ralph Waldo Emerson and that "individuality" crap he pushed. This country wasn't built by rugged individuals questing to the horizon, pushing ever onward. It was built by groups of people questing out, helping each other build houses and farms and towns and cities. Hell, even the quintessential rugged individualists, the fur trappers of the 1830s and 1840s seldom, if ever went out alone and they always came back to the rendezvous, they always needed the supply chain that stretched back to St Louis and the East Coast. Rugged individualists who went out on their own ended up like the skeleton in the grass, festooned with arrows, about whom the mule-driver in Dances With Wolves says, "I'll bet someone back east is going, 'Now why don't he write?'"

Post War America wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:I blame Ralph Waldo Emerson and that "individuality" crap he pushed. This country wasn't built by rugged individuals questing to the horizon, pushing ever onward. It was built by groups of people questing out, helping each other build houses and farms and towns and cities. Hell, even the quintessential rugged individualists, the fur trappers of the 1830s and 1840s seldom, if ever went out alone and they always came back to the rendezvous, they always needed the supply chain that stretched back to St Louis and the East Coast. Rugged individualists who went out on their own ended up like the skeleton in the grass, festooned with arrows, about whom the mule-driver in Dances With Wolves says, "I'll bet someone back east is going, 'Now why don't he write?'"

Indeed, funny how history doesn't exactly demonstrate the power of individualism. It's almost like our ability to form mutually assistant societies was a better evolutionary strategy.

The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:-snip-

Northern Davincia wrote:

The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:-snip-

http://www.wnd.com/2017/08/public-schoo ... ild-abuse/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... chool.html
https://www.academia.org/the-child-abus ... -politics/

Here's a good documentary to watch as well.

Hopeington wrote:

Petrasylvania wrote:How about if we merge Oklahoma and Kansas into a single country called Ancappistan?

Why would we want to share a state with those Inbred Idiots

Improved werpland wrote:

Northern Davincia wrote:http://www.wnd.com/2017/08/public-schoo ... ild-abuse/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... chool.html
https://www.academia.org/the-child-abus ... -politics/

Here's a good documentary to watch as well.

By chance I know about the guy who made that documentary. He is a hypocrite and an unethical asshole. He made a documentary where he smears Colin Trumbull (a famous anthropologist) as a racist for “misrepresenting” the Ik people (who he only got to see decades after The Mountain People, and whose claims he uncritically believed) and then goes off to make a documentary where he exploits a cargo cult.

The first two sources you posted I did not look at, but I must say for the third one that teachers don’t deserve to get shitty jobs just like the rest of us just cause several leaflets got into some kids’ backpacks two times.

Farnhamia wrote:

Post War America wrote:
Indeed, funny how history doesn't exactly demonstrate the power of individualism. It's almost like our ability to form mutually assistant societies was a better evolutionary strategy.

Assuming evolution was more than just a theory, of course.

Kernen wrote:

Salandriagado wrote:
If you really thought this way, you'd be living somewhere in rural Africa. Evidently the people around you being well educated is beneficial to you.

I have no idea why you think I need to go to a foreign country to find a high demand for my expertise.

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:

Kernen wrote:One of the benefits of private school is exclusivity. If everybody was in a private school, it wouldn't be exclusive, so private primary education doesn't have the incentive to expand dramatically. Especially when the public school can always undercut their prices.

In other words, the whole point of private education is to tout what's good enough for everyone else's kids as not being good enough for yours.

What a vile, elitist attitude toward anything, let alone such a vital service, let alone one that's vital precisely because it's to our mutual benefit that everyone be educated... unless, of course, private schools are there to educate spoiled rich brats in how to screw over the middle class, just like their fathers before them and their grandfathers before that, in a context the middle class can't see.

Northern Davincia wrote:

Improved werpland wrote:By chance I know about the guy who made that documentary. He is a hypocrite and an unethical asshole. He made a documentary where he smears Colin Trumbull (a famous anthropologist) as a racist for “misrepresenting” the Ik people (who he only got to see decades after The Mountain People, and whose claims he uncritically believed) and then goes off to make a documentary where he exploits a cargo cult.

The first two sources you posted I did not look at, but I must say for the third one that teachers don’t deserve to get shitty jobs just like the rest of us just cause several leaflets got into some kids’ backpacks two times.

The creator of a documentary doesn't matter, only the information presented in the documentary itself.

Improved werpland wrote:

Northern Davincia wrote:The creator of a documentary doesn't matter, only the information presented in the documentary itself.

Their credibility matters. It is very easy to distort information or interpret things lazily, as he did in Ikland.

I like most charter schools. I’m not 100% in favor of everything teachers unions do, but criticizing them when there are so many other fucked up things in education, and when so few public workers live semi-decently like teachers tend do, I’m on their side.

Northern Davincia wrote:

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:In other words, the whole point of private education is to tout what's good enough for everyone else's kids as not being good enough for yours.

What a vile, elitist attitude toward anything, let alone such a vital service, let alone one that's vital precisely because it's to our mutual benefit that everyone be educated... unless, of course, private schools are there to educate spoiled rich brats in how to screw over the middle class, just like their fathers before them and their grandfathers before that, in a context the middle class can't see.

Yes, your envy is palpable, and you want all children to suffer equally.

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:

Northern Davincia wrote:Yes, your envy is palpable, and you want all children to suffer equally.

No, I want them to all do well, like they do in Finland, where the rich don't get to just cut and run.

Even if Finland didn't exist, that would not make you qualified to claim such unwarranted certainty about my motives. That speculation says a LOT more about you than it does about me.

Northern Davincia wrote:

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:No, I want them to all do well, like they do in Finland, where the rich don't get to just cut and run.

Even if Finland didn't exist, that would not make you qualified to claim such unwarranted certainty about my motives. That speculation says a LOT more about you than it does about me.

By admitting that private education is about touting "what's good enough", you admit that they function better than public schools. Ergo, you desire to force children into a worse educational setting.
Finland is a homogenous and small nation. You cannot steal ideas from other nations when their circumstances are vastly different from ours.

Neutraligon wrote:

Northern Davincia wrote:By admitting that private education is about touting "what's good enough", you admit that they function better than public schools. Ergo, you desire to force children into a worse educational setting.
Finland is a homogenous and small nation. You cannot steal ideas from other nations when their circumstances are vastly different from ours.

I am not sure they do function better then public schools. See private schools have this ability that public schools do not have, namely to select their students. If private schools could not do that, I bet they would function basically the same as public schools.

Northern Davincia wrote:By admitting that private education is about touting "what's good enough", you admit that they function better than public schools. Ergo, you desire to force children into a worse educational setting.

Northern Davincia wrote:Finland is a homogenous and small nation. You cannot steal ideas from other nations when their circumstances are vastly different from ours.

Northern Davincia wrote:

Neutraligon wrote:I am not sure they do function better then public schools. See private schools have this ability that public schools do not have, namely to select their students. If private schools could not do that, I bet they would function basically the same as public schools.

The private schools I've seen operate on a lottery basis, not selection.

Northern Davincia wrote:

Neutraligon wrote:I am not sure they do function better then public schools. See private schools have this ability that public schools do not have, namely to select their students. If private schools could not do that, I bet they would function basically the same as public schools.

The private schools I've seen operate on a lottery basis, not selection.

Northern Davincia wrote:

The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:-snip-

http://www.wnd.com/2017/08/public-schoo ... ild-abuse/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... chool.html
https://www.academia.org/the-child-abus ... -politics/

Here's a good documentary to watch as well.

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:

Northern Davincia wrote:By admitting that private education is about touting "what's good enough", you admit that they function better than public schools. Ergo, you desire to force children into a worse educational setting.

Actually, "tout what's good enough for everyone else's kids as not being good enough for yours" is a context-sensitive statement. It doesn't require that it be "objectively" better (that depends on what you prioritize in education, obviously) just according to the very people advocating private schooling in the first place.

But even if it did, it'd only require comparison to how the USA is right now. Not to how it could be.

Northern Davincia wrote:Finland is a homogenous and small nation. You cannot steal ideas from other nations when their circumstances are vastly different from ours.

"Small" is a meaningless point. Yes, there are fewer people on whom to spend. There are also fewer people from whom to collect taxes, so the point is moot.

So what is it, then? Homogenity? Are you blaming America's problems with education on diversity?

Northern Davincia wrote:

Improved werpland wrote:By chance I know about the guy who made that documentary. He is a hypocrite and an unethical asshole. He made a documentary where he smears Colin Trumbull (a famous anthropologist) as a racist for “misrepresenting” the Ik people (who he only got to see decades after The Mountain People, and whose claims he uncritically believed) and then goes off to make a documentary where he exploits a cargo cult.

The first two sources you posted I did not look at, but I must say for the third one that teachers don’t deserve to get shitty jobs just like the rest of us just cause several leaflets got into some kids’ backpacks two times.

The creator of a documentary doesn't matter, only the information presented in the documentary itself.

Northern Davincia wrote:http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/browa ... story.html