Why do I use the word 'scam' so often in these posts on education? Because there are a few issues going on lately that, if they were about sports, or engineering, or airline pilots, would be seen as corrupt scams against the public health and safety.
Philadelphia Phollies
Let's go to Philadelphia first: "It’s a repeat of every year for the Phila school district. As the school year approaches they are shocked to report a massive deficit and beg the State of PA for more funding. The $12,000 per child simply isn’t enough, even though Parochial schools provide ten times the education for $9,000 per child. The district has a slight $80 million deficit this year. Last year they had a $100 million deficit and the mayor proposed a soda tax to fill the gap. It was defeated, so they raised property taxes instead. Mayor Nutter’s name is fitting. He is just another in a long line of Democratic mayors who have ruled Philadelphia since the 1950′s and whose policies of welfare handouts for their voting base paid for by taxing the producers, has resulted in a population decline from 2.1 million in 1950 to 1.5 million today.
$12,000 per year, per child is not enough. To use a favorite word of progressives (that's the current term, isn't it?) this is simply unsustainable. But no matter, abject failure is OK as long as you say "I'm for the children", "it's for the children", "union" and other tired sayings that have worked since the late 1960's. Empirical evidence and statistics don't matter. This is a crime and the children, as always, lose. The employees of the district don't: "For the average teacher earning $68,700 annually, benefit costs pile on an additional $44,100, meaning the average cost of employing a teacher in the system is $112,700."
If this were any other field, there would be real anger at the collapsing bridges, crashing airplanes, bad sports play - but with children in public schools - nothing. Not in the mainstream media or political arena.
Let's Create a Problem Where There is None - NYC
There is a trendy man made 'problem' when it comes to the specialized high schools in NYC. These schools are spectacularly successful, and they churn out literally thousands of literate, capable graduates per year. Our Elite Government Class Overlords think that the admissions process (a merit based exam that has math, reading comprehension and logic) that has worked for decades needs to be changed. Why? The racial makeup of the schools doesn't fit that THEY think it should be. This is an interesting case because the schools over the past 15 years have become predominantly Asian.
This is a problem made our of whole cloth. There are many things wrong with the NYC public school system - these schools are not part of any problem. It is interesting to notice how failing schools in bad neighborhoods garner little discussion, but the merit based schools are have a target on them by the Elites. It is almost as if there is a war against merit.
I am actually having a debate on Facebook about this with people who went to Tech, as I did. It is odd how cavalier they are about changing the requirements now that they've gone through the system. remember, this isn't a problem. Tech, Stuyvesant and Bx Science are success stories. Yet, because a politician feels that the racial makeup "doesn't look like NYC", it should be changed. This is purely illogical and self defeating.
Saturday, August 30, 2014
Friday, August 29, 2014
The Origins of the FED - How it Controls Money and People
The Federal Reserve is the topic you're not supposed to talk about. The FED, the central bank of the United States, took over the country in 1913. Does that sound like hyperbole? Only if you are uninformed and believing only the Organs of the Establishment that promote the myth that the FED is there for the public good.
“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.” – FDR letter to Colonel Edward House, Nov. 21 1933
“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.” – FDR letter to Colonel Edward House, Nov. 21 1933
Was FDR a 'conspiracy theorist'? Why did he say that? James Corbett, of the stellar independent news site corbettreport.com explains in this thorough documentary.
From Corbett's site: All our lives we’ve been told that economics is boring. It’s dull. It’s not worth the time it takes to understand it. And all our lives, we’ve been lied to.
War. Poverty. Revolution. They all hinge on economics. And economics all rests on one key concept: money. Money. It is the economic water in which we live our lives. We even call it ‘currency’; it flows around us, carries us in its wake. Drowns those who are not careful. We use it every day in nearly every transaction we conduct. We spend our lives working for it, worrying about it, saving it, spending it, pinching it. It defines our social status. It compromises our morals. People are willing to fight, die and kill for it.
But what is it? Where does it come from? How is it created? Who controls it? It is a remarkable fact that, given its central importance in our lives, not one person in a hundred could answer such basic questions about money as these.
War. Poverty. Revolution. They all hinge on economics. And economics all rests on one key concept: money. Money. It is the economic water in which we live our lives. We even call it ‘currency’; it flows around us, carries us in its wake. Drowns those who are not careful. We use it every day in nearly every transaction we conduct. We spend our lives working for it, worrying about it, saving it, spending it, pinching it. It defines our social status. It compromises our morals. People are willing to fight, die and kill for it.
But what is it? Where does it come from? How is it created? Who controls it? It is a remarkable fact that, given its central importance in our lives, not one person in a hundred could answer such basic questions about money as these.
Tuesday, August 19, 2014
How to Spot a Bad, if not Brainless, 'Argument'
Adam Carolla recently explained in an interview that he considers himself a conservative. He talked about wanting the people getting free breakfast in school to realize the principle behind such things, that the USA was founded not on taking money from others to give to someone else, but on working for what you have and being able to keep it.
He was pretty clear on what he meant, and it wasn't that difficult to understand his premise of letting the children know that there are principles involved with daily life.
A commentator on The Young Turks took offense to this. She 'argues' his points. What is fascinating to watch is how she doesn't address his points on the whole, and when she does she uses snark, ad hominem attacks, straw man arguments and ignorance to refute what Mr. Carolla said.
I am not the only one to notice this. I first noticed it during the 08 presidential campaign when Ron Paul would be maligned because of his views - not with logic and reasoning and evidence, but emotion and eye rolling. Rachel Maddow is the queen bee of this tactic, but the woman in this video seems to be gunning for second place in this field. Stefan Molyneux of Freedomain Radio completely destroys this woman's 'arguments'. I can't just type the word arguments because she doesn't make any, as Molyneaux shows you here.
It is a complete intellectual dismantling, and it should move you further away from picking a political 'side', as well as anything associated with leftism.
He was pretty clear on what he meant, and it wasn't that difficult to understand his premise of letting the children know that there are principles involved with daily life.
A commentator on The Young Turks took offense to this. She 'argues' his points. What is fascinating to watch is how she doesn't address his points on the whole, and when she does she uses snark, ad hominem attacks, straw man arguments and ignorance to refute what Mr. Carolla said.
I am not the only one to notice this. I first noticed it during the 08 presidential campaign when Ron Paul would be maligned because of his views - not with logic and reasoning and evidence, but emotion and eye rolling. Rachel Maddow is the queen bee of this tactic, but the woman in this video seems to be gunning for second place in this field. Stefan Molyneux of Freedomain Radio completely destroys this woman's 'arguments'. I can't just type the word arguments because she doesn't make any, as Molyneaux shows you here.
It is a complete intellectual dismantling, and it should move you further away from picking a political 'side', as well as anything associated with leftism.
Tuesday, August 5, 2014
David Rudisha - 100 Seconds of the Best Race Ever
Lost in the hype and the media blaze of the 2012 Olympics was the world record set in the 800m run. The 800m run is probably the most difficult race on the track. It is basically a half mile sprint, where for 80% of the time you are without the necessary oxygen to function.
This documentary shows how David Rudisha got to the pinnacle of the sport. What you need to notice is the humble surroundings. The track is dirt. There are no lanes. His coach is an old Irish Catholic missionary. It sounds like some derivative of 'Chariots of Fire' - except it is real. Watch how the bus spews out smoke. Watch the herding of cows and goats. Here, in this part of the world everything is glitz and glamor - seemingly made out of plastic. I was particularly observant of the school setting. The desks are old, the shoes are obviously donated by charities. The walls were dirty and the books worn.
Perhaps more people in "education" should watch this documentary - and pay particular attention to the last 3 minutes, where the coach is asked what the secret is. Of course he says there are no secrets. Unless, of course, work is a secret. Here, where all we hear is "if only we had more money", that premise is blown to bits by this Kenyan and his school, who have no money.
On the track, what did Rudisha do? Anyone with a track background will gape at the splits. His first 400m was a 49.3, and he came back in 50.6 for a 1:40.91.
Here's the 'best race ever' statistic. Last place in the 800m run in London in the 2012 Olympics would have WON the last 3 Olympic 800m races. 8th place ran a 1:43.77. Think about that.
Also think about the 2 Americans who finished 4th and 5th with times of 1:42.8 and 1:42.95. They went home without a medal. Unreal.
Here is the race itself.
Here is how it happened:
This documentary shows how David Rudisha got to the pinnacle of the sport. What you need to notice is the humble surroundings. The track is dirt. There are no lanes. His coach is an old Irish Catholic missionary. It sounds like some derivative of 'Chariots of Fire' - except it is real. Watch how the bus spews out smoke. Watch the herding of cows and goats. Here, in this part of the world everything is glitz and glamor - seemingly made out of plastic. I was particularly observant of the school setting. The desks are old, the shoes are obviously donated by charities. The walls were dirty and the books worn.
Perhaps more people in "education" should watch this documentary - and pay particular attention to the last 3 minutes, where the coach is asked what the secret is. Of course he says there are no secrets. Unless, of course, work is a secret. Here, where all we hear is "if only we had more money", that premise is blown to bits by this Kenyan and his school, who have no money.
On the track, what did Rudisha do? Anyone with a track background will gape at the splits. His first 400m was a 49.3, and he came back in 50.6 for a 1:40.91.
Here's the 'best race ever' statistic. Last place in the 800m run in London in the 2012 Olympics would have WON the last 3 Olympic 800m races. 8th place ran a 1:43.77. Think about that.
Also think about the 2 Americans who finished 4th and 5th with times of 1:42.8 and 1:42.95. They went home without a medal. Unreal.
Here is the race itself.
Here is how it happened:
Friday, July 11, 2014
The "State Licensing" Scam is Exposed by Khan Academy
I saw this on Gary North's site, and I think he is right. The Education Establishment will be the last bastion of the Progressive Era to fall, and the signs are already here:
"For over a century, there has been a mass illusion that has been fostered by beneficiaries of tax money. This money has gone to teachers and educators. This illusion is as follows: state certification necessary to be a good teacher.
This illusion has been basic to the creation of the teachers' union. It is this commitment to what is laughingly known as professionalism that has been the basis of legal barriers to entry. Progressive educators fostered this illusion early in the 20th century. They created a theory of education out of whole cloth, except this whole cloth was tattered cloth. There was never any scientific or any other kind of evidence that indicated that going through a teacher-training program designed by men and women on college faculties would in any way improve the education of children.
This is a classic case of people who had little or no personal experience in teaching school children, who sat down and designed a series of theories about what it takes to teach children. The theories kept changing. There were always rival theories. But they all had this in common: most of the people teaching these theories in university classrooms had never had personal experience or success in teaching school children.
This is the classic example of how universities work. People who teach in MBA programs have never owned businesses. People who teach psychology have never worked as full-time psychologists. Professors get themselves licensed by their own group, few of whom have had any experience in the free market, where profit and loss determine who survives and who fails. Then, having created a state-mandated barrier to entry, they earn above-market wages paid by taxpayers. This starts at the university level, and then it moves down to the very lowest levels of the educational system.
It is all a farce."
Salman Khan has singlehandedly shown that the establishment opinion, the approved opinion, the opinion that you're supposed to have - is wrong. Khan has no teaching credentials. He never took one of those idiotic state exams that certifies you as a 'qualified' public school teacher. Yet, he has 10 million students. This in your face dismantling and refutation of the educational process spells the end of the system. I'm guessing it will be within 10 years that what we see today will be unrecognizable. It is already starting. You can see it here:
"For over a century, there has been a mass illusion that has been fostered by beneficiaries of tax money. This money has gone to teachers and educators. This illusion is as follows: state certification necessary to be a good teacher.
This illusion has been basic to the creation of the teachers' union. It is this commitment to what is laughingly known as professionalism that has been the basis of legal barriers to entry. Progressive educators fostered this illusion early in the 20th century. They created a theory of education out of whole cloth, except this whole cloth was tattered cloth. There was never any scientific or any other kind of evidence that indicated that going through a teacher-training program designed by men and women on college faculties would in any way improve the education of children.
This is a classic case of people who had little or no personal experience in teaching school children, who sat down and designed a series of theories about what it takes to teach children. The theories kept changing. There were always rival theories. But they all had this in common: most of the people teaching these theories in university classrooms had never had personal experience or success in teaching school children.
This is the classic example of how universities work. People who teach in MBA programs have never owned businesses. People who teach psychology have never worked as full-time psychologists. Professors get themselves licensed by their own group, few of whom have had any experience in the free market, where profit and loss determine who survives and who fails. Then, having created a state-mandated barrier to entry, they earn above-market wages paid by taxpayers. This starts at the university level, and then it moves down to the very lowest levels of the educational system.
It is all a farce."
Salman Khan has singlehandedly shown that the establishment opinion, the approved opinion, the opinion that you're supposed to have - is wrong. Khan has no teaching credentials. He never took one of those idiotic state exams that certifies you as a 'qualified' public school teacher. Yet, he has 10 million students. This in your face dismantling and refutation of the educational process spells the end of the system. I'm guessing it will be within 10 years that what we see today will be unrecognizable. It is already starting. You can see it here:
Thursday, July 10, 2014
Public vs. Private
I discuss here why my public school world is disgusting and physically unkempt, whereas my private sector summer job is immaculate and spectacularly clean. The idea that employers and employees have some 'skin in the game' and can be fired has a lot to do with the difference in attitude and cleanliness among within the institutions.
Naturally, this is an unsanctioned opinion. Ask your teacher about the glories of the Public Sector - he may even say that the public sector is necessary and that the private sector is greedy and rapacious. You shouldn't tolerate that level of ignorance from your instructor - it is the private sector that funds the public sector. My take here is that in the private sector people generally act normal - in the public sector they act like slobs, because they can.
You may be wondering why the mountains of evidence never alter the opinions of the adults in your life. It is because they have no principles. Unfortunately, I've found that adults who identify with the 'left' are impervious to fact. They acknowledge nothing. The public sector vs. private sector debate is one of those instances.
Monday, June 30, 2014
Sports and Stories - How it's Done - Simmons and Michaels
Sports can be a colossal waste of time. Of all the things to spend time on, sports are high on the list of premiere time wasters. Once I started to think more independently (embarrassingly late in life), I pretty much ignored the sports world as I saw it for what it was: entertaining nothingness for the masses. Material for the Sheeple to get worked up over and then argue with each other rather than think about and discuss REAL things.
Well, I still like sports. I really can't escape the lure. No, I don't watch every Yankee game like I used to in the mid to late 1980's. (Alvaro Espinosa was an underrated shortstop if you must know). Watching the Spurs win the NBA title this year was wonderful. They play a great brand of basketball, there is a lot of ball movement, everyone can shoot and move, the team has an obvious plan and no ego. In MLB, I think you're foolish if you don't watch Clayton Kershaw pitch at least once, and you should watch Mike Trout play outfield for the Angels.
The sports reference sites are good to get your stats. I'm a stats person of the old school and I can't imagine what my HS years would have been like if I'd had a site like this. I had to read the stats on the page in the baseball encyclopedia or in Total Baseball. I probably would have failed out of high school - I would have been on stats overload. The other site I go to for sports is Grantland.com. Except for the liberal slant when it comes to anything not sports related (the pop culture is a waste of time as were the comments on the Donald Sterling Afffair), Grantland is an information rich and entertaining place.
The podcasts are well done. What made me do this post is the podcast with Al Michaels and Bill Simmons. This will show you how sports can still be worth your time. Al Michaels has been an announcer for a long time - notice the Old Man Shorts. Simmons is a Serious Fan with an eye for detail, a great memory, and an entertaining writing style. Simmons does the smart thing. The entire last 2/3 of this interview is Simmons simply asking Michaels if he as a story about (fill in the name of a sports star). He lets Al Michaels talk, and the stories are funny, interesting and entertaining. Michaels gives you the inside stuff without being salacious. It is good storytelling in the world of sports, and I have to admit - I still enjoy it immensely. I think you'll enjoy listening to this, especially if you're a sports fan:
Well, I still like sports. I really can't escape the lure. No, I don't watch every Yankee game like I used to in the mid to late 1980's. (Alvaro Espinosa was an underrated shortstop if you must know). Watching the Spurs win the NBA title this year was wonderful. They play a great brand of basketball, there is a lot of ball movement, everyone can shoot and move, the team has an obvious plan and no ego. In MLB, I think you're foolish if you don't watch Clayton Kershaw pitch at least once, and you should watch Mike Trout play outfield for the Angels.
The sports reference sites are good to get your stats. I'm a stats person of the old school and I can't imagine what my HS years would have been like if I'd had a site like this. I had to read the stats on the page in the baseball encyclopedia or in Total Baseball. I probably would have failed out of high school - I would have been on stats overload. The other site I go to for sports is Grantland.com. Except for the liberal slant when it comes to anything not sports related (the pop culture is a waste of time as were the comments on the Donald Sterling Afffair), Grantland is an information rich and entertaining place.
The podcasts are well done. What made me do this post is the podcast with Al Michaels and Bill Simmons. This will show you how sports can still be worth your time. Al Michaels has been an announcer for a long time - notice the Old Man Shorts. Simmons is a Serious Fan with an eye for detail, a great memory, and an entertaining writing style. Simmons does the smart thing. The entire last 2/3 of this interview is Simmons simply asking Michaels if he as a story about (fill in the name of a sports star). He lets Al Michaels talk, and the stories are funny, interesting and entertaining. Michaels gives you the inside stuff without being salacious. It is good storytelling in the world of sports, and I have to admit - I still enjoy it immensely. I think you'll enjoy listening to this, especially if you're a sports fan:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)