|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 18 2014 09:09 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2014 08:40 IgnE wrote: I'd argue with your implied point that being a "good leader" is more important than the results of the leading. Eh, fair point, but typically, results will come with good leadership.
No, not really. Good leadership is just one piece of a much larger picture.
|
On September 18 2014 08:37 xDaunt wrote: So does anyone still want to argue with my point that Obama is a bad leader? I'm not sure why anyone is surprised that he's backing down on the regs -- particularly in advance of the upcoming elections. It is not like it is out of character for him. True. The article makes it sound like he's caving to Republicans, but I'd be more curious to hear what Democrats and industry leaders or pollsters he'd been talking to. I could buy that this was a spineless caving in to political opposition but this smells more political.
|
Norway28747 Posts
On September 17 2014 22:57 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2014 20:26 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 17 2014 20:01 Velr wrote: Basically every country whiteout a good apprenticeship programm that goes parallel to purely academic education. France and Ireland come to my mind first (because i know these two), the UK and the US are probably the same.
Sure you can still achieve something whiteout getting a bachelor in these countries. But its way harder than it should be. There are miriads of children/young adults that are just fed up with School at the age of 15-20 and there has to be a way to still let them start a succesfull career whiteout making it unecessary difficult. There are actually many "children" in switzerland that choose not to go for University and instead make an apprenticeship. I am a huge fan of apprenticeship programs and I think it's great that 15-16 year olds who are sick of school and can't picture themselves going to university can choose some educational path that provides them with skills that they themselves consider useful and that allow them to find a good job.. We have somewhat of a two-tier system in Norway as well, but with one major difference ; you don't have to choose until you are 15-16. I think having the separation at an earlier age is basically (academically) beneficial to the kids who remain in the tier 1 system, because the level of education and challenge provided for the 'smarter' kids can be slightly higher and thus the learning output also increases, but it comes with two very serious societal drawbacks imo. 1: I cannot understand how this will not hamper social mobility, and 2: it creates a very real separation / barrier between people who go for apprenticeships vs people who go to university. When the socialization is shared for a longer period of time, lasting relationships can be formed between people from different layers of society. Social mobility is actually highest in Scandinavia, Germany, and the Low Countries, whereas it's relatively low in places like Britain and the U.S.
While that's true, there's to some degree a separation between US and Europe where in Europe, money is not the sole determiner of social status. In Norway, a plumber or electrician might very well be wealthier than a university professor, but they still have different social status. Like, you can talk about various forms of capital - basically money/culture. While our societies are very egalitarian and allow for pretty good social mobility in terms of money-capital, the cultural capital reproduces itself through generations. I would argue that the cultural capital is more of a determiner of social status seeing as due to the egalitarianism of our society money is rarely the excluding factor (especially not in groups rich in cultural capital), whereas saying "it tastes like wine" (when tasting wine) can be one.
Essentially, while Germany and Netherlands allow you to be reasonably wealthy through going the apprenticeship route, the young age people need to choose direction (and yeah, generalizing because I understand that you can study at a later point in time) means that children from homes where it is natural and obvious that they are going to study medicine in university are separated from children whose future involves blue-collars before they form lasting friendships. This in turn, while I have not looked at statistics, would to me make it very likely that 1: children will normally have both parents from the same "educational tier" and 2: these children will normally end up in the same educational tier as their parents. (With the addendum that a general increase in education level would obviously have more tier 2 become tier 1.)
Norway is much the same really, we have great social mobility in terms of money (which is mostly just a consequence of all jobs paying well, only the unemployed or practically unemployed qualify as poor here), but sons of teachers and journalists become teachers and journalists, and while the plumber's son doesn't have to end up a plumber, he's not gonna become a doctor.
|
United States43634 Posts
I doubt anyone is more disappointed in Obama than the left.
|
Uhm… Really ?
If i look around in my area there is like no correlation between the parents Job and that of their children (at least not to a degree that would raise an eyebrow). Pilot -> Teacher/Journalist, Banker -> Electrician/Pharmacist, Farmer -> Accountant/ Economics-Engineer, Street Worker -> Programmer/Cook, Musician -> Mechanic Wine-Trader -> Car-Mechanic Teacher -> Lawyer
I don’t know if this is diffrent in germany (but germans in general are more likely to move out „early“ and therefore leave their old community behind, at least from what i gather online). But the separation your talking about just did not happen for me and to about None of my friends/collegues. It didn’t happen in school due to being seperated, it did not happen when people went for their apprenticeships or to university… It juts didn’t happen, at least not because someone took a diffrnet educational path than someone else.
|
On September 18 2014 18:24 Velr wrote: Uhm… Really ?
If i look around in my area there is like no correlation between the parents Job and that of their children (at least not to a degree that would raise an eyebrow). Pilot -> Teacher/Journalist, Banker -> Electrician/Pharmacist, Farmer -> Accountant/ Economics-Engineer, Street Worker -> Programmer/Cook, Musician -> Mechanic Wine-Trader -> Car-Mechanic Teacher -> Lawyer
you should avoid saying street worker to english people because it's pretty much synonymous with a hooker. I have no idea who had the great idea to use that name for a social worker in german speaking countries but the guy should be hanged.
or maybe you did mean hooker who knows
|
Norway28747 Posts
it's a generalization, and somewhat of a poor one because I guess jobs are just so diverse nowadays and most kind of fall between chairs, not being fully settled in either camp. But in the generalized scheme of like, university professor/teacher/journalist/doctor/lawyer vs mechanic/plumber/electrician/carpenter, it is definitely uncommon for a kid with parents from either group ending up in the opposite group in Norway, and while I have no statistics, it strikes me as logical that it would be even more so the case in Germany. This is kinda just me extrapolating based on personal experience, and might well be flawed, it's just that when I look at the relationships I have today, beyond family it's basically all people I met after I turned 12, and they've influenced me and I've influenced them in a myriad of ways, and I'm finding it hard to believe that my life had taken the same direction had I only been surrounded by future academics through my adolescence.
I don't think any of those examples really showcase a class journey of the sort I meant, but yeah, I guess a pretty significant majority of jobs will be accessible regardless of background.
|
To follow up on the story a week or so ago, the Air Force amended its rules to allow airmen to omit "so help me God" if they choose:
Following a review of the policy by the Department of Defense General Counsel, the Air Force will now permit airmen to omit the phrase, should they so choose. That change is effective immediately, according to an Air Force statement.
“We take any instance in which Airmen report concerns regarding religious freedom seriously,” Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James said in the statement. “We are making the appropriate adjustments to ensure our Airmen’s rights are protected.
“The Air Force will be updating the instructions for both enlisted and commissioned Airmen to reflect these changes in the coming weeks, but the policy change is effective now. Airmen who choose to omit the words ‘So help me God’ from enlistment and officer appointment oaths may do so.” It is consistent with all statutory laws in the US, which allow people to "affirm", meaning to make a pledge equivalent to an oath but without reference to a supreme being or to swearing.
|
On September 18 2014 19:03 Skilledblob wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2014 18:24 Velr wrote: Uhm… Really ?
If i look around in my area there is like no correlation between the parents Job and that of their children (at least not to a degree that would raise an eyebrow). Pilot -> Teacher/Journalist, Banker -> Electrician/Pharmacist, Farmer -> Accountant/ Economics-Engineer, Street Worker -> Programmer/Cook, Musician -> Mechanic Wine-Trader -> Car-Mechanic Teacher -> Lawyer
you should avoid saying street worker to english people because it's pretty much synonymous with a hooker. I have no idea who had the great idea to use that name for a social worker in german speaking countries but the guy should be hanged. or maybe you did mean hooker who knows 
I assumed he meant a guy building a street. And honestly, the stupid decision is calling anything a street worker that does not involve working on streets. Neither a social worker nor a hooker work on streets. Sure, both work while they are on the streets, but so do street cleaners, newspaper boys, taxi drivers, and a lot of other different people.
|
On September 18 2014 19:03 Skilledblob wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2014 18:24 Velr wrote: Uhm… Really ?
If i look around in my area there is like no correlation between the parents Job and that of their children (at least not to a degree that would raise an eyebrow). Pilot -> Teacher/Journalist, Banker -> Electrician/Pharmacist, Farmer -> Accountant/ Economics-Engineer, Street Worker -> Programmer/Cook, Musician -> Mechanic Wine-Trader -> Car-Mechanic Teacher -> Lawyer
you should avoid saying street worker to english people because it's pretty much synonymous with a hooker. I have no idea who had the great idea to use that name for a social worker in german speaking countries but the guy should be hanged. or maybe you did mean hooker who knows 
Oh... I meant "Road construction worker" .
|
On September 18 2014 19:08 Liquid`Drone wrote: it's a generalization, and somewhat of a poor one because I guess jobs are just so diverse nowadays and most kind of fall between chairs, not being fully settled in either camp. But in the generalized scheme of like, university professor/teacher/journalist/doctor/lawyer vs mechanic/plumber/electrician/carpenter, it is definitely uncommon for a kid with parents from either group ending up in the opposite group in Norway, and while I have no statistics, it strikes me as logical that it would be even more so the case in Germany. This is kinda just me extrapolating based on personal experience, and might well be flawed, it's just that when I look at the relationships I have today, beyond family it's basically all people I met after I turned 12, and they've influenced me and I've influenced them in a myriad of ways, and I'm finding it hard to believe that my life had taken the same direction had I only been surrounded by future academics through my adolescence.
I don't think any of those examples really showcase a class journey of the sort I meant, but yeah, I guess a pretty significant majority of jobs will be accessible regardless of background.
This happens everywhere, including the U.S. Unless you have some long-lasting friends from your earlier school days, you socialize with the people that you meet more often, usually from work or other similar situations. My family sure as hell doesn't know any doctors, lawyers, professors (aside from the ones I was taught by in school), etc. My parents, my friends, and my parents' friends are travel agents, computer programmers, church ministers, parole officers, paramedics, etc.
|
I think this issue of social mobility relating with school is only going to get much much worse. With the way our priorities are shaping and the rise of tea party libertarians and selfish policies of not wanting to pay for someone else in health care, education or any other social programs, the resulting budget cuts have already been very noticeable for me in how it is affecting my kids' education. I think this is going to have some pretty harsh long-term effects, and will probably only get worse with more budget cuts. Also, my last child just started kindergarten where he was required to take an assessment test, so the selection process starts right from the starting gun now- my others never had to take this test.
|
On September 18 2014 18:17 KwarK wrote: I doubt anyone is more disappointed in Obama than the left. I might agree for the simple reason that they have to account for having voted for him, twice. The ones with terrific hindsight have to reflect on how much of this could've been predicted before his first election and from his first term of office.
|
California Gov. Jerry Brown on Wednesday declared a state of emergency in response to a raging wildfire that has threatened thousands of homes in what is being called the state's worst-ever fire season.
Brown has put all state resources at the disposal of his Office of Emergency Services in response to the so-called King fire, the largest of 11 major wildfires raging across the drought-ridden state, and another powerful blaze farther north, he said.
Fire crews in California's rugged Sierra Nevada battled to gain the upper hand on Wednesday against a blaze that threatened at least 3,500 structures, including 2,000 homes, and has displaced hundreds of residents as flames roared for a fifth day through dry timber and brush west of Lake Tahoe.
Most of the threatened homes were in Pollock Pines, 60 miles east of Sacramento.
The King Fire has scorched nearly 44 square miles of state land and the El Dorado National Forest since it erupted Saturday, fire officials said. California's fire season, which typically runs from May to October, is on track to be the most destructive on record, state fire managers say.
A force of 3,300 firefighters had managed to carve containment lines around 5 percent of the blaze's perimeter, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection's website.
Numerous campgrounds were closed in the forest, a popular destination for river rafting and other activities east of Sacramento.
Source
|
On September 19 2014 00:18 Danglars wrote: I might agree for the simple reason that they have to account for having voted for him, twice. The ones with terrific hindsight have to reflect on how much of this could've been predicted before his first election and from his first term of office.
Eh, was pretty obvious right from the start with who he surrounded himself with in his nominations and appointments. Just a lot of wishful thinking and lesser evil pragmatism from the left really. But also not any different than RINOs and the problems on the right?
|
On September 19 2014 00:46 screamingpalm wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2014 00:18 Danglars wrote: I might agree for the simple reason that they have to account for having voted for him, twice. The ones with terrific hindsight have to reflect on how much of this could've been predicted before his first election and from his first term of office. Eh, was pretty obvious right from the start with who he surrounded himself with in his nominations and appointments. Just a lot of wishful thinking and lesser evil pragmatism from the left really. But also not any different than RINOs and the problems on the right? If we were to move beyond how liberals characterize the internal differences and factions of the Republican party, and on to the principal struggles and clashing ideas, then yes, there are similarities. Let's take the case of an incumbent Republican that has gone from being some-what RINO into mostly RINO. He is in a safe seat and hasn't done anything egregious (say, Boehner's fully surrendered leadership, or McConnell's steep attacks on tea party candidates), so his challengers cannot ignite mild opposition into personal support. Support or oppose? I could go even further. Consider an electorate that can't wrap their minds around a world without hefty farm subsidies. How can you expect candidates in some districts to oppose on principal when it is electoral suicide? The populace hasn't heard the former winning arguments from leaders articulated well in a generation.
It was dithering Republican leaders that handed Obama softballs on the issues (and principles drift in the Bush years that surrendered the platform) that could've had vastly different outcomes in the 2008 and 2012 elections. I think Levin said it best, speaking on modern GOP candidates and advisors, They’re afraid of Obama, they’re afraid to take these steps. You look at this election in 2012 of Obama. Obama should have been beaten by a halfway competent presidential candidate in the Republican Party that could articulate the principles of the party and expose Obama’s weakness. We didn’t do it. Millions of people stayed home. Who are those million of people? Those were Reagan Democrats. Those are blue collar Democrats. Stop chasing ethnic groups, stop chasing genitalia. Talk to the American people. Talk about liberty, opportunity. Explain to them that Obama’s wrong, and that we need to unleash the American people and unleash the economy.
So to answer your question, screamingpalm, it doesn't sit well with me at all looking at the current state of the opposition party. Moderates grew too comfortable in the leftward swing keeping conservatives anchored hard in the GOP as "easy votes," and felt free to talk mush to pursue independents, and focus on strategies to say what this or that group wants to hear. We all feel blame at the failure of education and the slowness of the widespread rejection of statism that hasn't been collected and given (enough) voice.
|
On September 19 2014 00:46 screamingpalm wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2014 00:18 Danglars wrote: I might agree for the simple reason that they have to account for having voted for him, twice. The ones with terrific hindsight have to reflect on how much of this could've been predicted before his first election and from his first term of office. Eh, was pretty obvious right from the start with who he surrounded himself with in his nominations and appointments. Just a lot of wishful thinking and lesser evil pragmatism from the left really. But also not any different than RINOs and the problems on the right?
This. I'm definitely disappointed with him and his time in office but I still think I made the right decision voting for him twice. If the GOP could put up a reasonable candidate it would be another story entirely.
|
On September 18 2014 23:37 screamingpalm wrote: I think this issue of social mobility relating with school is only going to get much much worse. With the way our priorities are shaping and the rise of tea party libertarians and selfish policies of not wanting to pay for someone else in health care, education or any other social programs, the resulting budget cuts have already been very noticeable for me in how it is affecting my kids' education. I think this is going to have some pretty harsh long-term effects, and will probably only get worse with more budget cuts. Also, my last child just started kindergarten where he was required to take an assessment test, so the selection process starts right from the starting gun now- my others never had to take this test. Could you explain that test a bit more? They're often used to identify and correct learning gaps. This could be new spending to help students rather than separate the already doing good from the rest as you are suggesting.
|
On September 19 2014 02:50 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Could you explain that test a bit more? They're often used to identify and correct learning gaps. This could be new spending to help students rather than separate the already doing good from the rest as you are suggesting.
From what I understand, it has to do with budget cuts- and also to separate and identify exceptionally gifted (kindergarten at least) students I believe (from what I saw of the examples of the testing). They now have both half-day and full-day classes (it was previously all full-day), and part of this is to assess who to assign for each. We wanted our son to go full-day as he was premature and we feel he is a bit behind the curve, but they said that they felt he wasn't ready yet. I have a much more pessimistic view than you do considering what I've seen from my older kids' and the effects of budget cuts for them already. Large class sizes, classrooms in trailers, shortened school year and program cut-backs etc.
|
On September 19 2014 03:03 screamingpalm wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2014 02:50 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Could you explain that test a bit more? They're often used to identify and correct learning gaps. This could be new spending to help students rather than separate the already doing good from the rest as you are suggesting. From what I understand, it has to do with budget cuts- and also to separate and identify exceptionally gifted (kindergarten at least) students I believe (from what I saw of the examples of the testing). They now have both half-day and full-day classes (it was previously all full-day), and part of this is to assess who to assign for each. We wanted our son to go full-day as he was premature and we feel he is a bit behind the curve, but they said that they felt he wasn't ready yet. I have a much more pessimistic view than you do considering what I've seen from my older kids' and the effects of budget cuts for them already. Large class sizes, classrooms in trailers, shortened school year and program cut-backs etc. If I were you I'd move. Not every community is like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|