|
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 November 21 2012 07:49 xDaunt wrote:
I suspect that this thread may be a bit of a clusterfuck if it tries to cover every country's politics and all related global events. It was hard enough to keep things focused in the US general elections thread where, at least nominally, the focus was on only US politics.
On November 21 2012 08:14 kwizach wrote:
imo, you should keep this thread focused on US politics. The international events discussed on this site are often important enough to warrant their own threads.
I agree with these sentiments. Also it will help to avoid the sort of posts like "Dear America, vote Obama, The Rest Of The World" that about 100 people posted in the old thread. We want legitimate discussion of policy and not sweeping generalizations that our entire nation is backwards compared to Europe.
|
|
|
I think having a "megathread" isn't optimal at all for discussion. 100 different topics being talked about at once is just mayhem.
|
Now that it's a US politics thread, it's fine!  I would definitely have missed such a thread if the US elections thread had been closed without an alternative like this one.
|
On November 21 2012 07:44 WhiteDog wrote:
We are overreacting to Israel attacking Gaza for the second time in the last 5 years... I think people should also refrain themselves from making out of context and uneducated comparaison.
Syria is not an invasion, it's an internal affair which explains why a lot of people are being careful in how they handle the matter. On the other side, in Gaza there is an invasion in an on going problem that has been going on since 60 years or so and that condense a lot of problem.
Not all things are equal, the number of death is not the only thing that matter. Gaza has a history, and people are tired of seeing, hearing the same thing going on over and over again, which is why people "overreact".
I doubt the families of the dead would think it's an overreaction. Both sides need to back down - Hamas has to realise that launching rockets at Israel with no consideration for where they will hit will not be tolerated, and Israel has been treating Palestine like an occupied territory for decades, but peace can only come if they stop actually killing each other. Have to wonder if a two-state solution will really solve anything, or will it just be giving them the time and resources to properly tool up and have a good go at killing each other.
Is it me or has the White House been remarkably silent on what is happening with one of the States' staunchest allies?
|
Surprised this thread hasn't been slain yet.
|
On November 21 2012 15:38 Sanctimonius wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 07:44 WhiteDog wrote:
We are overreacting to Israel attacking Gaza for the second time in the last 5 years... I think people should also refrain themselves from making out of context and uneducated comparaison.
Syria is not an invasion, it's an internal affair which explains why a lot of people are being careful in how they handle the matter. On the other side, in Gaza there is an invasion in an on going problem that has been going on since 60 years or so and that condense a lot of problem.
Not all things are equal, the number of death is not the only thing that matter. Gaza has a history, and people are tired of seeing, hearing the same thing going on over and over again, which is why people "overreact". I doubt the families of the dead would think it's an overreaction. Both sides need to back down - Hamas has to realise that launching rockets at Israel with no consideration for where they will hit will not be tolerated, and Israel has been treating Palestine like an occupied territory for decades, but peace can only come if they stop actually killing each other. Have to wonder if a two-state solution will really solve anything, or will it just be giving them the time and resources to properly tool up and have a good go at killing each other. Is it me or has the White House been remarkably silent on what is happening with one of the States' staunchest allies?
Well, if you think about it, there isn't much the White House can or should say. It is no secret that Obama is not the biggest fan of Netanyahu and presumably his style of leadership, meaning the White House's attitude toward recent events is tacitly unhappy. Saying so publicly doesn't really do anything other than further worsen relations with the current Israeli administration.
|
United States13896 Posts
On November 21 2012 14:39 bkrow wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 13:18 farvacola wrote:Ok, y'all convinced me to make the thread specific to US politics I've gone ahead and PM'ed Plexa to get the name changed, and I've amended the OP. From this point on, we shall attempt to stay somewhat within the realm of US interests. In keeping with that idea, here is an interesting perspective on the "fiscal cliff". “The best thing that happens is we go off the cliff. That (a recession) is what the U.S. economy needs,” Paul Gambles, managing director at MBMG International, a financial advisory firm, told CNBC Asia's “Squawk Box."
The $600 billion in tax hikes and government spending cuts, set to take place in January 2013 if policymakers do not reach a compromise for avoiding them, are essential to debt reduction and the long-term balancing of the U.S. budget, Gambles said.
“If we extend the Bush tax cuts and carry on getting deeper and deeper in debt, believe me that’s a lot uglier,” he added.
In a speech delivered at the Economic Club in New York on Tuesday, Bernanke said 2013 could be a very good year for the U.S. economy if politicians reach a deal to avoid the “fiscal cliff.” The central bank chief added that the Fed does not have the tools to offset the negative effects brought about by the economy falling off the cliff. (Read More: Full Text of Bernanke Remarks)
Failure to avert the combination of tax hikes and spending cuts is expected to result in an economic contraction of 0.5 percent next year, according to estimates by the Congressional Budget Office, but Gambles said delaying fiscal discipline would be even more detrimental for the economy.
“Nobody wants to have a recession, but they are part of the cycle, they are essential. We've been avoiding or minimizing recessions for the last 15 years or so. We've been getting away from reality, that’s why we have these fantasy markets, asset prices that have no relation to reality,” Gambles added. Source Two things came to mind when i read this. Firstly, the fiscal cliff represents a drastic response to dealing the America's debt issues that is simply not necessary. There was a great article linked in the US election thread that did a quick but informative analysis of the US debt crisis. It essentially concluded that America has approximately ten years to put in place effective policies to tackle their debt problem. Ten years. This sort of "let's go over the fiscal cliff and just start a-fresh" is a very, VERY dangerous line of thinking and represents immense arrogance as a receding US economy does not only effect themselves. Secondly, I sort of thought that it was that arrogance in particular that would prevent the US from going over the cliff. Republican obstruction aside, I believe US politics is too proud of an institution to let the economy crash... again. Just my 2c edit: also on that Wiki with debt:GDP - i am not sure how up to date that is because i remember reading something recently that showed Italy's debt to GDP around 120% and Spain's also looks a bit lower than i thought it was..
Yeah, Spain has a real unemployment issue, not to mention a number of other factors, but not so much debt. They've got economic problems of their own but they aren't of the same nature as a Greece or Italy.
I'd agree with you on the fiscal cliff in general. The important thing to keep in mind with the fiscal cliff is that it is not in the same cataclysmic category as the immediate US debt crisis in 2011. So yes, in some respects the US could weather the consequences of not reaching a deal. There are significant consequences, and not ones that can be explained away by "its necessary to purge and move forward." That's bullshit. If the economy stagnates again in recession for another few years that can mean millions of young adults are putting off getting married, having kids, basically putting their lives on hold for a while because employment and financial concerns make that stuff less attractive. There are real impacts, and a pundit saying that it is the best thing trivializes the risks everyone would assume under sequestration, and the possible further interruption of my generation's life plans. Its easy for a financial analyst on CNBC to push these issues under the rug because he'll be fine, but a lot of people will struggle.
Ignoring the title of this Washington Post, the graphic about % impact on GDP growth, estimated by the CBO is crucial here. Consider the CBO said that the tax cuts on lower brackets comprise 1.2% and the rich .1% that makes the extension of the lower bracket tax cuts the major thing that could harm economic growth. That 1.2% negative impact on GDP should be the top priority to avoid in these talks. That carries the most risk. The payroll tax cut has support on both sides of the aisle already and should be extended, that's pretty widely accepted at this point. Defense cuts aren't as simple as bringing soldiers home. I was in St. Louis in late September and news about Lockheed Martin was plastered all over the front page, because a large number of "average Joes and Jills" work there.
So, the entire idea of this was that these things are a pretty nasty pill to swallow, with significant detrimental side effects, and that Congress and the White House would choose to go the more responsible middle road to treat our deficit issues. Compromise is not an inferior solution to this problem.
p.s. farvacola, could you put some basic info about the fiscal cliff in the OP? This is the biggest domestic issue we face at the current time, and its sort of been undercovered imo recently in light of foreign affairs. As far as negociations go on capitol hill go, I think that's a good thing, more will get done if the politicians don't have the outliers of their parties blowing hot air about small issues of negotiations, blown up by 24/7 media coverage. That aside, I'd really like to have a strong discussion on this issue here because it is something that will directly effect us. There's pretty much just over 3 weeks to go before Congress is scheduled to adjourn, and though that probably will be pushed back, it still makes right now a crucial time to get informed on the issue if you haven't already. Basically we would be remiss not to even mention this as a "Current event" even if it isn't getting a ton of play in the media.
http://cbo.gov/publication/43544
http://www.cfr.org/economics/fiscal-cliff/p28757
|
On November 21 2012 16:27 p4NDemik wrote:
that can mean millions of young adults are putting off getting married, having kids, basically putting their lives on hold for a while because employment and financial concerns make that stuff less attractive.
I feel like you're going to find that this is a fairly constitutive feature of the postmodern period in general... if you look at overall trends in the history of civilization you see a pushing-back of life milestones, I feel like that will most likely continue (if anything faster)
edit: which is to say, why don't we just accept that demographic shift and use up all that extra youth labor getting them educated?
|
United States13896 Posts
On November 21 2012 16:32 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 16:27 p4NDemik wrote:
that can mean millions of young adults are putting off getting married, having kids, basically putting their lives on hold for a while because employment and financial concerns make that stuff less attractive. I feel like you're going to find that this is a fairly constitutive feature of the postmodern period in general... if you look at overall trends in the history of civilization you see a pushing-back of life milestones, I feel like that will most likely continue (if anything faster)
True, and a lot of that comes from the relative necessity of post-high school education to maintain relatively secure employment in the current day American economy. But what we're seeing now is going beyond College. If things are being delayed into your late 20's and early 30's that isn't something we should just accept. If an undergraduate degree isn't really a guarantee of much of anything (outside of serious debt for many unless they are lucky) that's a problem in my eyes. Now if we were really getting into a grand discussion I would say that there is probably just as much fault in the American educational system that leads to this problem, and I don't want to ignore that factor, but if the demand of the US economy is not meeting the numbers of employment-eligible adults that's not something to ignore, or just accept either.
I really do hope that there is continued discussion about education after we get past this. But we need to take it one thing at a time right now and the current issue of the day is the Fiscal Cliff.
|
Australia8532 Posts
On November 21 2012 16:32 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 16:27 p4NDemik wrote:
that can mean millions of young adults are putting off getting married, having kids, basically putting their lives on hold for a while because employment and financial concerns make that stuff less attractive. I feel like you're going to find that this is a fairly constitutive feature of the postmodern period in general... if you look at overall trends in the history of civilization you see a pushing-back of life milestones, I feel like that will most likely continue (if anything faster) edit: which is to say, why don't we just accept that demographic shift and use up all that extra youth labor getting them educated?
I think you're missing the point.
Whatever the "constitutive feature" of this generation is irrelevant because whatever it may be, will be made worse.
|
I don't know, I feel like the idea that you can learn all the school you need to learn by the time you are 22 is a little unrealistic... I think we need to start thinking in terms of expanding the expected length of stay in higher learning. The problem is that nobody is sure what's a good investment? then invest in the education of the younger generation, when in doubt that's always the best option. I know the market can't think like that but that's the optimal allocation of society's resources, just sayin'
edit: @above, you're going to have to elaborate. We may be talking past one another.
|
On November 21 2012 16:27 p4NDemik wrote:
p.s. farvacola, could you put some basic info about the fiscal cliff in the OP? This is the biggest domestic issue we face at the current time, and its sort of been undercovered imo recently in light of foreign affairs. As far as negociations go on capitol hill go, I think that's a good thing, more will get done if the politicians don't have the outliers of their parties blowing hot air about small issues of negotiations, blown up by 24/7 media coverage. That aside, I'd really like to have a strong discussion on this issue here because it is something that will directly effect us. There's pretty much just over 3 weeks to go before Congress is scheduled to adjourn, and though that probably will be pushed back, it still makes right now a crucial time to get informed on the issue if you haven't already. Basically we would be remiss not to even mention this as a "Current event" even if it isn't getting a ton of play in the media.
I've gone ahead and added a brief synopsis of the fiscal cliff and am putting up some good articles as I find them. The Bloomberg one on what Bernanke said is quite good. In terms of who on what side should compromise on what, I think Obama ought to stick hard to his campaign promise of raising taxes on the upper most income bracket. Efficiency minded cuts to entitlement programs are, in my opinion, the right place for Democrats to make concessions, in that they allow them the best chance at both fulfilling campaign promises and continuing to provide a strong and sensible social safety net.
|
United States13896 Posts
On November 21 2012 16:45 sam!zdat wrote:
I don't know, I feel like the idea that you can learn all the school you need to learn by the time you are 22 is a little unrealistic... I think we need to start thinking in terms of expanding the expected length of stay in higher learning. The problem is that nobody is sure what's a good investment? then invest in the education of the younger generation, when in doubt that's always the best option. I know the market can't think like that but that's the optimal allocation of society's resources, just sayin'
edit: @above, you're going to have to elaborate. We may be talking past one another.
The human capacity for learning far exceeds what American schools are able to milk out of it. We could learn so much more in the same amount of time if we were able to reduce increasing inefficiency, redundancy, and try to change the general culture of American schools. That's no easy feat but I really take issue with someone saying that we as humans aren't capable of doing more in the given timespan we have than be are now. Expanding the length of stay in the educational system does nothing to tackle the real issues as to why there is deterioration and ineffectiveness in inner-city schools for example. Furthermore, it would likely compound the mounting issues of student loan debt if we added additional mandatory years of post-high school education. This would only serve to further put kids in the hole after college and is the wrong way to tackle the issue. Unfortunately I feel like this is how higher learning has been approached in the U.S. in the last few decades and that's a shame. Universities, seeing less government support, have focused on increasing enrollment, and putting more focus on graduate courses to keep people in the system after they have their undergrad degree. As a consequence we're falling behind the curb quite simply. South Korea is kicking our ass. Canadians are kicking our ass. Japan is kicking our ass. China is kicking our ass, especially in mathematics. How many T.A.s or professors you guys have had have been Chinese? We're losing out. We need a shift in how we think about education.
But back to the issue that got us here - accepting pushing back these societal standards as the new norm. That's not acceptable. Just like in education, if we're falling behind here, if we are not properly utilizing our human resources, the country as a whole is suffering, and people individually are not living fulfilling lives that they want to be living. We can't accept that this gap between when we are genetically programmed to kick things into high gear and when our society permits it continues to grow.
edit: It's easy for us as young people to slip into complacency after being dealt a difficult hand compared to people who came out of college say 10 years ago. Hell, when I left high school I was pretty much the embodiment of this mindset. That said, we can't consign ourselves to a more difficult future, or even worse, consign our children to an even more difficult future than we have set before us right now. Education is the biggest issue here in the long run, but the intertwined economic issues cannot be ignored either.
|
Oh, I don't disagree with you about any of that. But I had 17 years of high-quality formal education and that was not enough. (edit: I'm just saying that, in general, there's much, much more to learn now in order to be an educated person than there has been at any point in human history)
I absolutely agree that schools should be much, much harder than they are, and that our culture's attitude toward learning in general is embarrassing
edit: the difference may be that I certainly do NOT see this as a matter of "competitive edge" in the business-talk sense
|
United States13896 Posts
No doubt, education was a non-factor in politics this election cycle, at least nationally. I know locally where I live I was pleased to see a number of levies that have been shot down for years on end pass this time around. Seriously, as I was growing up watching the election news, but not really understanding. I pretty much came to assume that the words "school levy" and "fail" were synonymous or attached at the hip. I was really lucky to receive the benefits of some great private schooling and I'll forever be indebted to my parents for that.
I hope that's indicative of a greater trend of a shifting of attitudes, we'll see. If it is, even then it will take some time for national politicians to realize and ride the wave, producing federal legislation.
On the broadening of the curriculum, I agree, this is fueled by technology growth which makes past jobs obsolete, and in turn education is falling behind. As we recognize this is happening though, given the choice of a) improving overall quality of education and b) simply lengthening it, I think the choice is clear.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
I actually agree with sam here. I had pretty decent education and to be honest, I feel like we rush kids into careers way too early. For me it's more an issue of maturity and "finding yourself" than it is knowledge though, though knowledge is a great plus. The thing is, however, students can already delay their graduation and spend five, even six years in university if they want to. iirc super seniors are getting more and more common. But really, I wouldn't mind if we extended high school by a year or two, but if we did that we'd have to revamp the entire high school system (should do it anyway).
If only it were possible to send all students abroad for a year.
|
On November 21 2012 17:06 p4NDemik wrote:
How many T.A.s or professors you guys have had have been Chinese? We're losing out. We need a shift in how we think about education.
What does their race have to do with anything if they are here, teaching Americans in an American college? Those professors and TAs in general want to stay in the good old US of A.
Sure the white males have definitely dropped the ball in terms of where they were 50 years ago in employment and educational achievement but that isnt the same thing as "America is screwed."
If China and South Korea and Japan want to torture their high school students and a fair portion of them leaks over into the United States than the Americans are winners. They got the first 10-12 years of education paid for by a foreign government and now get the fruits of the labor.
If the rest of America became like Asian Americans in terms of educational achievement than the US would be an amazing place indeed. But even if they dont, the fact that Asian Americans are the fastest growing demographic and that foreign PhDs are still welcome (less so recently though, and this bad trend must be reversed!) is positive news.
The time to get worried is when foreign born students start flocking and stay in Chinese universities. Or whatever country you wish to view you as your main rival.
|
United States13896 Posts
On November 21 2012 17:30 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 17:06 p4NDemik wrote:
How many T.A.s or professors you guys have had have been Chinese? We're losing out. We need a shift in how we think about education. What does their race have to do with anything if they are here, teaching Americans in an American college? Those professors and TAs in general want to stay in the good old US of A. Sure the white males have definitely dropped the ball in terms of where they were 50 years ago in employment and educational achievement but that isnt the same thing as "America is screwed." If China and South Korea and Japan want to torture their high school students and a fair portion of them leaks over into the United States than the Americans are winners. They got the first 10-12 years of education paid for by a foreign government and now get the fruits of the labor. If the rest of America became like Asian Americans in terms of educational achievement than the US would be an amazing place indeed. But even if they dont, the fact that Asian Americans are the fastest growing demographic and that foreign PhDs are still welcome (less so recently though, and this bad trend must be reversed!) is positive news. The time to get worried is when foreign born students start flocking and stay in Chinese universities. Or whatever country you wish to view you as your main rival.
As a general fact, American universities are importing Chinese professors and academics, particularly in that field. I bring this point up not to in any way denigrate anyone who is Chinese. Rather, the point is that we as a country are not meeting our needs and are not producing enough qualified talent within our own education system. That is the problem. I want to make this clear, you're misinterpreting my point here. Obviously we don't blame those who come here to make up for our inability to meet demand in this particular field. We try to identify the weaknesses in our educational system stateside.
(edit: Or rather we do not have the necessary incentives to attract what qualified individuals we do have into teaching within the U.S. Which is still a problem. Once again not because I have anything against any other nationality that may step in there to fill need, but rather because it is still an area of vulnerability. Just like when a nation gets too reliant on foreign energy, if we are too reliant on other countries to keep our educational system afloat we are vulnerable to market forces we can't control. Once again, nothing against any ethnic group or anything. This is just the simple economics of education so to say.
From the reading I have done considering the deficiencies we've had in the U.S. especially in the field of mathematics, I think the more concerning factor is the former, rather than the latter of these two issues. Actually after thinking about it I don't know. There is a strong argument to say that the former is due in large part to the latter)
I didn't mention white males once, I don't know where you interpreted this as my point. Nor did I say we are "screwed," the point is that we are falling behind, quite simply, and in the interest of improving ourselves personally and as a whole nationally these are things we have to consider. I am stressing these points because I think this is important, not because I think there necessarily is impending doom. Other national education systems that are performing better than the U.S. are not perfect by any means, but I think classifying them as "torture" is extremely harsh. I have read youth suicides for example are high in Korea, yes, but their programs for mental health conditions are also marginally better than 3rd world countries for comparison.
You have complete agreement with me on issues of immigration and work visas. Open arms.
I disagree that we have not yet reached a point at which concern is warranted. This should be a constant concern. Its been 10 years since the No Child Left Behind Act was implemented for example. Kids who have been in the system under this system their entire educational life are nearly at the point of graduating high school. When that happens we had better be paying attention to what the results were.
|
On November 21 2012 18:03 p4NDemik wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 17:30 Sub40APM wrote:On November 21 2012 17:06 p4NDemik wrote:
How many T.A.s or professors you guys have had have been Chinese? We're losing out. We need a shift in how we think about education. What does their race have to do with anything if they are here, teaching Americans in an American college? Those professors and TAs in general want to stay in the good old US of A. Sure the white males have definitely dropped the ball in terms of where they were 50 years ago in employment and educational achievement but that isnt the same thing as "America is screwed." If China and South Korea and Japan want to torture their high school students and a fair portion of them leaks over into the United States than the Americans are winners. They got the first 10-12 years of education paid for by a foreign government and now get the fruits of the labor. If the rest of America became like Asian Americans in terms of educational achievement than the US would be an amazing place indeed. But even if they dont, the fact that Asian Americans are the fastest growing demographic and that foreign PhDs are still welcome (less so recently though, and this bad trend must be reversed!) is positive news. The time to get worried is when foreign born students start flocking and stay in Chinese universities. Or whatever country you wish to view you as your main rival. As a general fact, American universities are importing Chinese professors and academics, particularly in that field. I bring this point up not to in any way denigrate anyone who is Chinese. Rather, the point is that we as a country are not meeting our needs and are not producing enough qualified talent within our own education system.
But America has never been able to produce qualified talent to fill your education system. I dont understand why it bothers you: I'd rather have a system that encourages future Albert Einsteins to move to my country no matter where they were born than try the much more complicated task of creating Albert Einsteins.
And despite having 'more rigorous' pre-college education systems it is not at all clear that either China or South Korea have been able to perform better than the United States in measures of either economic or psychological well being. I just dont buy the claim that "Chinese students did better on international standardized tests than Americans" automatically leads "Americans are going to be worst off because of it." And quite frankly I even question the performance of an average foreign student compared to an average American ones; perhaps the people from non-America that are encountered in a college setting literally represent the top 1%.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
