DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Christians4LessGvt on March 18, 2012, 09:39:00 PM
-
Conservatives believe in creating prosperity to lift people out of poverty.
Liberals believe in dividing prosperity to make all of us equally poor.
-
Conservative are clueless about how to lift anyone out of poverty.
They have never done it, and don't know how.
Compare the percentages of people living in poverty in the US with those in Western Europe and it is clear what needs to be done to eliminate poverty.
-
By western Europe do you include Ireland and Greece?
Spain and Italy?
These economys need rescue.
Why not include Eastern Europe? Where the socialism is older and deeper.
-
I believe frances has areas that don't live up to it's reputation
-
Conservative are clueless about how to lift anyone out of poverty.
They have never done it, and don't know how.
whatz you talking bout bro?....Never?.....Ha Ha....now thats funny!
i personally have lifted people out of poverty by giving them jobs
one guy was living in his car....countlesss others "staying with friends"
they accepted jobs and worked their ass off
they actually lifted themselves out of poverty once given the chance
now they own homes.....some have gone on to start their own companies
business lifts people out of poverty like nothing else on the planet
business and free enterprise is the biggest poverty eliminator in human history
nothing else comes close
-
Yeah, you deserve a frigging Nobel Prize for Humanity.
The fact is that poverty is higher in the US than in most of Western Europe. The reason is that capitalism is not a universal solution.
-
The fact is that poverty is higher in the US than in most of Western Europe.
The reason is that capitalism is not a universal solution.
Most of Western Europe is market system/free enterprise/capitalism.
It works.
Best poverty eliminator in human history.
And will work anywhere.
It is universal....thats the way human nature and logic work.
Reality is what it is.
-
Then what we need in this country is Western European capitalism. The kind we have here sucks.
-
if capitalism is so great why do americans fear foriegn competitian? I always thought the "buy america only "slogan was a sign america can`t compete. I hear alot about patriotism ,but very little about quality of product.
-
if capitalism is so great why do americans fear foriegn competitian?
Fear of competition?
Hardly....much less so than most of the entire planet!
We allow more imports and do import more than almost anyone.
So if we have fear, it much less than most.
-
I forgot the person name but recently he used people fear of china taking over business to win an election. But what you mention is also frowned upon by the" buy american only" folks also.
but I`m curious is it safe to park an import car in all of america( i can`t name the area specificly,m way too many)? I still hear such act will at least get it keyyed.
-
The kind we have here sucks.
LOL...compared to what?
Europe is going broke.
Are we perfect?...No.
But we have one of the highest ratings in the HDI.
Currently the Unites States is #4 in the world in the The Human Development Index (HDI).
And that's even with a huge influx of poor uneducated immigrants.
So you can pretend our system "sucks"
but most in the world would give anything to be here.
I guess "sucks" is in the eye of the beholder!
-
(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y273/ItsZep/Politics/6632d3d1.jpg)
-
I recall the story as well....where a rather liberal college student talked about the need to redistribute wealth, because there were so many who just didn't have what others had. So, the logically minded teacher told her, what a great idea, and oh, by the way, those straight A's you are earning? Well we have some students who are getting D's and F's, and really could use some A's. So we're going to take some of your A's, and of course the GPA associated with them, and give them to much more needy students. The Straight-A Student was agast at the thought. I wonder why??
-
This is a very stupid analogy, often quoted by right wingers. Grades are not the goal of a class, acquiring knowledge is the goal. Grades are not money.
It would make better sense to reward those with A's by charging them the least amount, and charging those with D's and F's more, if you really wanted to use money to maximize learning.
-
It's dead on. Sorry
-
I agree, it is dead on.
-
actually that kind of grading system would not be liberal, but parental. Only a parent(no matter what party) with influence would agree thier child should get thier fair share. people tend to forget thier are lot more types of group out thier then just the main two.
-
Naa...it'd be liberal. Person A performs x and is rewarded with y
In the college example, x is performance and educational improvement, y is the grade
In the job place, x is performance and work-related improvement, y is their salaried income
In both cases, its the reward that's being redistributed based on some notion that someone else didn't perform as well, and so they need some help.......that has to come from someone else
-
still not neccesarily liberal
the concept is still originally parental, but carried over to college and work place.
-
We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one Kimba, since redistribution of wealth, in this case grades, is demonstrably liberal
-
fair enough
-
parental basically is liberal
thats what those half-wits wanna try to do
be everyone's parent or nanny
they think they know what's best
they are control freaks
the need to control everyone & be in everyone's business
from washing machines, diswashers, cars, food, light bulbs
it's a frickin mental disorder
-
true but the group of those parents are not always liberal.
ex. ESL tend to teach kids whose parents are highly conservative.
-
It's not the parents redistributing the grade. That'd be the governing body....ie the school. But I understand the point you're trying to reach, with Cu4's additional comments
-
Grades in a class are not income. They should be an incentive to maximize learning and performance.
A class grade is simply the score the instructor assigns to the amount of material that he deems that the student has learned.
I used grades in this way when I was teaching. I clearly indicated that the class graded would be ¼ assignments, ¼ tests, ¼oral performance and ¼ final exam. Oral performance was based on responses to questions I asked every student in class most days. Students who were absent without a valid excuse received an F for oral performance. I allowed students to correct errors on assignments for two weeks after the assignment. I passed out a grade summary every two or three weeks. I tutored students individually or in groups during office hours. Most did not take advantage of this, but some did.
\
I did not "curve" grades, ever. After ten years teaching I know what a student could learn if they studied enough.
Grades are NOT the same as a salary. If you receive a salary from an employer, you have more money, and he has less.
If you receive a grade from a professor, it should indicate that you have learned something. The more you learn, the higher the grade. But at no time does the professor know LESS.
To a student who thinks it through, a grade is not a reward as a salary is, it is an index of how much he has learned, and an ongoing incentive to improve.
-
no curve
then your a smart teacher.I asked the kids in my family what they think of the curve. They said it`s great because it`s super easy to get the class to agree to lower it so everybody gets a good grade without studying too much. Their are very few stereo type student not caring about the classmates and raise the curve. it actually encourages kids to not gets A`s
-
Grades in a class are not income.
Never said it was....its a reward for their performance....an incentive for many....as the higher GPA the better the resume' looks and job prospects get. Simple as that. Higher salary is the incentive to maximize one's job performance. The higher your salary, the better your job prospects are
They should be an incentive to maximize learning and performance.
Exactly.....just as income is to the work force, its incentive to maximize one's job performance ::) That's why the analogy is dead on, which is why you find it ridiculous. What teacher on earth would redistribute grades? Yet that's exactly what folks like yourself advocate and push for....redistributing the rewards of one's hard earned performance to those who ....... didn't perform so well. Same damn concept
-
I have NEVER advocated redistributing grades, that is a blatant LIE.
My assumption is that students in my class are treated as knowing nothing of the subject.
One cannot make a similar assumption about wealth at birth.
I am for taxing the rich about 4% at most on income above $250K, and paying an inheritance tax on estates of above $5 million of perhaps 20%.
I hardly call that "income redistribution"
-
How is renumeration for work diffrent from assigning grades based on school performance?
I think the cash is a lot like getting graded, I never thought either one absolutly fair , nor need be.
-
I explained in detail how it is different.
Grades are not like money at all. Grades indicate how the student has already benefited from studying. Grades don't cost the instructor anything.
-
As we've gone over before, you can rationalize anything....like how racist rhetoric isn't really racist, if its coming from someone with a (D) after their name, or happen to be black. The point is, I demonstrated how the anolgies are dead on....in detail. Grades don't equal money, regardless of how many times you try to claim that's what's being said.
Grades equal reward for performance. So does money/income
And to deal with your other deflection effort, no one claimed you wanted to redistribute grades, so you can drop that asanine attempt. You want to redistribute other peoples monetary reward they have recieved in the performance of their job. ITS THE SAME AS IF A TEACHER WANTED TO REDISTRIBUTE OTHER PEOPLE'S EDUCATIONAL REWARD THEY RECEIVED IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR SCHOOLING
-
How is renumeration for work diffrent from assigning grades based on school performance?
It's not
-
It is only barely comparable if a person is paid on a piecework basis.
But again, the professor is paid the same amount regardless of the grade he assigns.
The employer pays less for a lesser performance and keeps more. It is therefore not comparable.
Students are not working for the professor, it is the other way around: the student pays the school, which pays the professor.
Srudents are not working for a grade: their actual reward is the material that they have learned, not the grade.
-
Sorry....your (ir)rationalizations aside, its dead on comparable, so you can stop with issues never being made, like what the professor is payed who's giving the grades, though ironically the better the professor, the higher his monetary reward (INCOME). If he advances on to adminstration positions, even a higher reward.
Grades equal reward for performance. So can money/income
Someone who wants to redistribute other peoples monetary reward they have received in the performance of their job is the same as if one WANTED TO REDISTRIBUTE OTHER PEOPLE'S EDUCATIONAL REWARD THEY RECEIVED IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR SCHOOLING
Dead on
-
You are dead wrong and full of crap.
-
Sorry if them facts and logic cause more grey hairs. I feel for yas
-
true but the group of those parents are not always liberal.
so?....and all control freaks aren't liberal
-
actually that kind of grading system would not be liberal, but parental.
No it wouldnt.
Only a parent(no matter what party) with influence would agree thier child should
get thier fair share.
define "fair share"?
what is fair about giving someone something they dont deserve?
no matter whose rug rat they are?
liberals tend to want to give things to people what they dont deserve
thus SIRS point is straight on
-
To a parent fairshare means thier kid go to the next grade /graduate
-
To a parent fairshare means thier kid go to the next grade /graduate
Passing students on to the next grade that are undeserving is neither fair or wise.
-
Not saying i agree with,just pointing out how it started. I never said parents are socially resposible .but if you think about it very few parents would care about other kids if it involves thier own kids grades.
-
Of course all control freaks are not liberal.
The government of North Korea are major control freaks. So were Pinochet's goons. So are the Saudi religious police.
-
To a parent fairshare means thier kid go to the next grade /graduate
Exactly so.
And to a liberal a person ought to have all his needs and wants supplied whether he is earning them or not.
-
I explained in detail how it is different.
Grades are not like money at all. Grades indicate how the student has already benefited from studying. Grades don't cost the instructor anything.
This is more of a simularity than you think it is.
It doesn't cost the government much to print a lot of money , but if they overindulge the money looses value in the process.
As you say it isn't costing the Professor directly to give grade easily, but the Professors credibilility is his stock and his grades can suffer from inflation.
-
No, they do not.
With over 12,000 colleges and universities in this countries, the HR types who look at transcripts have no clue as the habits of individual instructors. Most colleges do not even have the professor's name on the transcript.
Grades are not salaries. Grades are intended to show students their progress during the course, and their mastery of it on the transcript.
Professors issuing grades are not at all like the government printing money.
-
Another simularity!
And one I had not considered before you pointed it out.
When a dollar changes hands we don't really know how hard its previous owner worked to get it.
Now you inform me that grades are just as fungable as money is.
-
I don't know what you mean by that.
Look, I told you how I regard grades, how I issued grades, and what I consider to be a fair tax policy. I do not consider grades and salaries to be similar at all. I did what I considered fair and just, and told students every detail of how they would be evaluated, and why.
-
No different than what an employer tells his employees
-
That was not true of any job I ever held. Certainly never in such detail.
My instructions were "your job is to learn". Not do anything for me, to learn for their own benefit.
-
Sorry...same concept, as you merely rewarded those students with grades instead of money. The better they did in learning, the better the grades given. The better an employee does at performing their function, the better their salary.
It's sad that a "professor" can't grasp that
-
In what job do you get paid more for doing a better job?
Unless you are doing piece work, I can't think of any.
Either you do an acceptable job and keep the job, or you don't and get fired.
In rare instances, occasionally, you get a promotion, if and only if there is an opening.
-
that`s quite true. in businesses it`s extremely hard to notice outstanding workers and it`s very hard for companies to get them also. In that show undercover boss it`s a recurring theme. It`s kinda public knowledge most 7/11 clerks are collerge students, but none will ever consider working there as a career and is totally unaware that company has many programs to encourage it.
I always thought one of the biggest flaws in a company is the restriction normally place in it`s education programs(only learn what`s related to the job). It`s a rare person who willing wants to learn to begin with so I very much doubt a free education will break a company.
note recently companies are now complaining not enough qualified people for them to hire now.
-
In what job do you get paid more for doing a better job?
Pretty much anyone.....especially seen in professional sports. Nearly everyone I've known has seen a raise in their salary, based on their accomplishments. PT I's here, work & strive to become PT II's, then on to administrators. You're trying to claim you had the same salary as a teacher, thru-out your entire career?? Are you that bad a teacher??
-
As a rule, salaries were raised on a percentage basis for the entire faculty. For example, they would announce a 3% raise for the next year's contract, and I would get somewhere between 3 and 3.5%.
I know of no case in all my years of teaching where the superintendent, principal, dean or provost called any faculty member into the office and said "Congratulations! because of your great performance, we are giving you a $X raise this year, next year, whenever." It just doesn't work that way. I know of no school where it does.
I recall the pharmacist and owner of a drugstore where I worked handing me $75 extra because I worked 78 hours one week when everyone else was on vacation.
-
Just gave you multiple examples of folks making more based on their accomplishments, just like a teacher giving better grades for better results/accomplishments. Rationalize all you want, but you've been hosed on this one
-
Only in the bizarro world of sirs.
Grades are not the same as salaries.
Favoring a 3-4% raise in the taxes of the mega rich is not "income distribution" equivalent a grade of C to every student in a course.
Salaries are determined largely by supply and demand. Grades are not.
Salaries are determined by factors other than the largesse or lack of same of the employers.
Grades should never be determined in this way.
-
we try to base as much as we can on commissions or bonus type money
base salary is $$$ amount and you can do X, Y, Z to increase your money
we used to have a problem of employees walking around "visiting" while on the clock
we simply added a phone bonus.....every call they take and place an order they get a quarter.....
some increase their wage by $1, $2, $3, or more an hour
needless to say...we dont have a problem of people wandering around bullshitting anymore
ya wanna take a smoke break?....
hey we and other employees say "go right ahead" and I take your quarters!
ha ha....
-
Unm xo is quite right sadly
It pretty much public knowledge teachers get little rewards for good service.if anything bad performance is protected
Ex. The rubber room- a teacher deemed unsafe around student is placed in a empty room for the day with full pay.
-
The Rubber Room is a thing of the past. It only existed in NYC Public Schools for several years.
If a teacher was reported as being a molester by a student or students, the district could not fire him until the truth of the charges was ascertained. Neither could it put him in the classroom and risk getting sued if there was another complaint. So the teacher had to serve time waiting in a "rubber room" until there was a hearing.
I understand that hearings do not involve much waiting now.
Right wingers like to talk about rubber rooms because they assume that it is a common feature of many school districts. But it isn't.
Bad performance is not protected anywhere I have taught. If you are a bad teacher in Junior High or High School, the students will drive you nuts.
If you are a bad teacher in college, you won't get tenure and will be bounced out within a couple of years.
-
Grades are not the same as salaries.
For the 798th time, NEVER SAID THEY WERE :o
If you are a bad teacher in college, you won't get tenure and will be bounced out within a couple of years.
What's that you say?...YOU'RE REWARDED IF YOUR PERFORMANCE IS DEEMED IMPROVING/GOOD?? I'M SHOCKED I TELLS YAS....SHOCKED AT THIS REVELATION
-
In what job do you get paid more for doing a better job?
Farming.
Singing.
Playing gitaur.
Making pottery.
Translating.
Fishing /hunting guide.
Wait staff.
Gold mining.
Aircraft piloting/Navagation.
Custom auto paint.
Most of all, Salesmen on comission.
It is my opinion that working for a smaller organisation makes it more likly that you will be payed in real accordance to performance than you would if working as a smaller part of a large organisation.
-
actaully in a large company it`s very hard to improve due to the nature of the work.
ex. copy person in a college library.
after a point those folks transfer and hope the next assignment will help them shine.
-
In any case, immediate pay for improved performance is not the usual case for most jobs, and a higher grade for better performance is the standard in any well-taught course.
Employers can be greedy with their money. Raises they do not give can mean more money for their own personal use.
Instructors have no reason to be greedy about grades. If they give the entire class an A, they will get fewer complaints than if they give everyone the same lower grade of B, C, D or F.
-
Grade inflation is not a signifigant thing?
-
Grade inflation is up to the instructor. I know of no one who got complaints with grades so long as the professor clearly explained what students would be graded on and precisely how grades would be calculated. Occasionally, I would have some student pop in and tell me that they needed an A in my course to do this or that. I would tell them to bring in all their tests and I would have them add up everything and determine four grades: class participation, assignments, tests and the final. Then add those four and divide by four. I would ask them what did they get, and if they said 88.7, I would say that they needed an 89.5 to round up to a 90, or A.
As a rule that settled the issue. On the syllabus, I stated "I do not give 'extra credit' work." In HS, teachers would assign some report or something,and they would download stuff off the Internet and stick their name on it. That was extra credit.
I never had the grade dispute committee recommend that I ever change a grade, so they put me on the committee for eleven years. About a quarter of the professors that had disputed grades were very vague about how students were graded. In such cases, I and a couple other professors had some stuff drawn up as recommendations. Usually they developed less subjective and vague systems.
We had a couple of professors who gave students nothing but A's and B's. No one ever complained about their grades, so we could do nothing about it.
-
So it was part of your job to guard the real worth of your grade?
I don't say that grades are exactly like money , but that grades have a lot of value and are in some respects like money.
-
I considered that my grades should be dealt with in a logical, professional and easily comprehensible manner, that is all. I had no control over anyone else's grades and gave no advice about grades to other professors unless they asked.
-
I don't know how much employers collude to determine the worth of man hours work.
Perhaps a serious diffrence is that professors are not in competition for a students time and effort.