OBAMA FIRES A 'ROBIN HOOD' WARNING SHOT

[Sigaba]

An educational psychologist at USC's School of Education has offered a competing definition of education. He defined an education as a set of tools and skills that empower a student to reach goals that the student sets for himself. To me, this definition establishes a distinct difference between education and indoctrination.

My own experiences have led me to conclude that the educational system is tilted too far towards indoctrination. Educators, especially in the humanities and social sciences, already have an incredible opportunity to privilege their views over those of their students through the selection of course materials. Educators should (dare I say 'must'?) do a better job at letting students make up their own minds. While I do think a certain degree of indoctrination is needed to establish ground rules and expectations given the limited length of an academic term, it is simply not an educator's prerogative to attempt to rewrite the values of his or her students.

My own preference would be for young people to be taught the critical thinking skills and communication skills they need to evaluate rigorously the utility all information they encounter in regards how that information helps them meet their goals. I have less of a problem with a person who has read widely and thought deeply and disagrees with me than an indoctrinated person who may appear to share the same core beliefs.

Any information that has lasting merit will survive intense scrutiny; information that does not have merit will not. Faith in God endures because the faithful scrutinize and wrestle with their beliefs on a daily basis, not because they're indoctrinated. I am confident that such an approach will result in a citizenry that won't agree on every issue but, at least, would be able to give Senator Obama what he's thus far avoided: a thorough vetting.

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by nmap

I just read a market newsletter, and it includes an item that seems appropriate to the current discussion:

Consumer spending, which makes up 68% of the US GDP is falling precipitously-- this is very worrisome. The upper two-fifths of consumers purchase more than the combined spending of the other three-fifths. With Obama's tax increases taking effect in a receding economy, we could really see a drastic turnaround from the years of steadily increasing spending we've witnessed over the last decade.


Ironic, isn't it? The very programs he promotes as helpful may well deepen and worsen the present economic problems.

I heard a quote today on Fox News, "A rising tide raises all boats."

Which translates you cannot take from one and expect everyone to prosper. When the upper tax bracket is being taxed at 50% they will stop spending and it will roll down hill in a very bad way.

If obama takes office with a House and Senate in democratic control and implements his tax cuts to the poor and extreme taxes on the upper half there will be hell to pay. The business owners will fire 50-75% of their people to make up for the losses.

Watch this video.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nb2Ll1Kmwg

[nmap]

I agree, Team Sergeant - The video may actually understate the problem. In fact, the job loss on some businesses may be 100%, even though the business will continue to function.

(Disclaimer - the information I'm going to use was valid some years ago, but the U.S. tax code may have changed in the meantime. In addition, taxes are not my field. The material below was researched but not acted upon.)

It is possible to set up an offshore corporation and completely avoid corporate tax, while minimizing personal tax liability. My research focused on Grenada, but appeared to apply to other offshore venues as well. The cost to set up the corporation was about $1,500 US, with annual fees of a few hundred dollars. The corporation, so long as it was an operating corporation - as opposed to a purely financial corporation - did not create a U.S. tax liability for the shareholders. This would apply even to a corporation owned 100% by a U.S. citizen. A 10-year tax waiver with the government of Grenada required a short, simple, one-page form.

In some cases - say, a firm that created web pages for a fee - moving from the U.S. to an offshore location would be trivial. U.S. employees would be compensated, and tax would be owed on their personal income. However, earnings retained by the corporation would not be taxes. And, too, it would be possible to hire people offshore to do some of the jobs. Thus, a business that hired people and paid taxes would simply depart.

Could an individual proceed from tax avoidance (which is legal) to tax evasion (which is illegal?). Sure. But I prefer to abide by the law, and will not go into the possibilities here.

Will people seek to avoid (and evade) taxes? I think so. The possible gain for avoidance will be sufficiently large to persuade many.

This will lead to calls for more regulation, more restrictions, and more laws. A socialist government will seek to control the flow of capital. But that will simply drive an exodus of people, as experienced by the UK in the 1970's. It was known as the "brain drain", because those with the education or business acumen to depart a high-tax nation did so.

All of which will be very bad for the country. The mischief may take a decade or more to repair.

[Box]

Ladies and Gentlemen, allow me to introduce "Joe Sixpack"

"Wurzelbacher" is just a code name



As far as the Paraclete video,
lets vote for Tim D.... he has a cool wind tunnel!!!

[incommin]

Any of you remember the days when soldiers couldn't train because there was no fuel for the vehicles; when barracks rats were buying their own cleaning supplies and TP because there was none in the supply room? Or when FTX's were paper drills because there were no funds for training???? I do. And those days are going to return under Obama..... Tax the wealthy and gut the military; after all, it will not be needed anymore. We will talk our way through our differences; even if it kills us......

[Paslode]

I am baffled at the people, Smart people, Well off people I know that have taken the BHo bait hook line and sinker.........It gets scarier by the day. I shake my hand in dismay more often by the day. I don't get it! And I don't see why they can't see past the facade of this flag buring POS.

He wants to take from me and mine so he can spread it to the masses....Things are going to get ugly if BHo wins.

I pray to God BHo falls short, and I hope J-Mac shows up with his game face on tonight.

[ZonieDiver]

Originally Posted by Paslode

I am baffled at the people, Smart people, Well off people I know that have taken the BHo bait hook line and sinker.........It gets scarier by the day. I shake my hand in dismay more often by the day. I don't get it! And I don't see why they can't see past the facade of this flag buring POS.

He wants to take from me and mine so he can spread it to the masses....Things are going to get ugly if BHo wins.

I pray to God BHo falls short, and I hope J-Mac shows up with his game face on tonight.

I vacationed last week in California, with a small-business owning couple who have taken the bait and swallowed the hook. They repeated falsehoods (one about McCain "stopping" solar energy in Arizona" time and again - even after I corrected them. Still all the while, they becried taxes and government regulations that impede their business. They just don't - and won't - "get it"!

I'd like to get my daughter out of LA and "saw" that state off the map. Arizona property values could use some 'beachfront' property!

[Gypsy]

Originally Posted by ZonieDiver

I Still all the while, they becried taxes and government regulations that impede their business. They just don't - and won't - "get it"!

Oh they'll "get it" if BHO wins, and won't even get a kiss first.

[Richard]

Richard's $.02

[Guy]

Originally Posted by SF_BHT

Wonder why Jessy and Al have not been all over the media helping him?

Obama told those two to STFU! You idiots will take away my "white" votes.

Stay safe.

[Sigaba]

Zonie, don't saw just yet! There are some Californians who do not support Senator Obama.

Originally Posted by ZonieDiver

I vacationed last week in California, with a small-business owning couple who have taken the bait and swallowed the hook. They repeated falsehoods (one about McCain "stopping" solar energy in Arizona" time and again - even after I corrected them. Still all the while, they becried taxes and government regulations that impede their business. They just don't - and won't - "get it"!

I'd like to get my daughter out of LA and "saw" that state off the map. Arizona property values could use some 'beachfront' property!

[USANick7]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

An educational psychologist at USC's School of Education has offered a competing definition of education. He defined an education as a set of tools and skills that empower a student to reach goals that the student sets for himself. To me, this definition establishes a distinct difference between education and indoctrination.

My own experiences have led me to conclude that the educational system is tilted too far towards indoctrination. Educators, especially in the humanities and social sciences, already have an incredible opportunity to privilege their views over those of their students through the selection of course materials. Educators should (dare I say 'must'?) do a better job at letting students make up their own minds. While I do think a certain degree of indoctrination is needed to establish ground rules and expectations given the limited length of an academic term, it is simply not an educator's prerogative to attempt to rewrite the values of his or her students.

My own preference would be for young people to be taught the critical thinking skills and communication skills they need to evaluate rigorously the utility all information they encounter in regards how that information helps them meet their goals. I have less of a problem with a person who has read widely and thought deeply and disagrees with me than an indoctrinated person who may appear to share the same core beliefs.

Any information that has lasting merit will survive intense scrutiny; information that does not have merit will not. Faith in God endures because the faithful scrutinize and wrestle with their beliefs on a daily basis, not because they're indoctrinated. I am confident that such an approach will result in a citizenry that won't agree on every issue but, at least, would be able to give Senator Obama what he's thus far avoided: a thorough vetting.

This is very insightful...

I would like to discuss this a little bit more if your game, but I want to properly define what I understand as "indoctrination" first, so I know we are on the same sheet.

I look at "indoctrination" like I do "prescription" or "prescriptivism". Essentially telling someone what to believe. Or prescribing one system or belief over another.

Would you agree with that definition, or would you say that indoctrination is more malicious, in that it accepts the willful misleading, or manipulation of facts in order to attain its goals?

Thanks...

By the way, the reason I ask, is because I do see a place for prescriptivism in education along with critical thinking.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

An educational psychologist at USC's School of Education has offered a competing definition of education. He defined an education as a set of tools and skills that empower a student to reach goals that the student sets for himself. To me, this definition establishes a distinct difference between education and indoctrination.

My own experiences have led me to conclude that the educational system is tilted too far towards indoctrination. Educators, especially in the humanities and social sciences, already have an incredible opportunity to privilege their views over those of their students through the selection of course materials. Educators should (dare I say 'must'?) do a better job at letting students make up their own minds. While I do think a certain degree of indoctrination is needed to establish ground rules and expectations given the limited length of an academic term, it is simply not an educator's prerogative to attempt to rewrite the values of his or her students.

My own preference would be for young people to be taught the critical thinking skills and communication skills they need to evaluate rigorously the utility all information they encounter in regards how that information helps them meet their goals. I have less of a problem with a person who has read widely and thought deeply and disagrees with me than an indoctrinated person who may appear to share the same core beliefs.

Any information that has lasting merit will survive intense scrutiny; information that does not have merit will not. Faith in God endures because the faithful scrutinize and wrestle with their beliefs on a daily basis, not because they're indoctrinated. I am confident that such an approach will result in a citizenry that won't agree on every issue but, at least, would be able to give Senator Obama what he's thus far avoided: a thorough vetting.

You've hit upon a number of points which would make a good thread unto itself and, maybe, should be so. As a hgih school principal for some 13 years, let me hit just a couple of points which could be expanded under a dedicated thread to this topic.

• There are as many types of schools in this country as there are shoes...and parents should find the type of school that "fits" their family/child.
  
• Any major urban area will have a broad offering of public, private, and parochial schools. This is also becoming a trend in smaller communities, and remember, there is always the 'home school' option...which many do here in Texas. For the most rural areas, there are also 'distance learning' options where a student can attend high school in an interactive virtual classroom on-line through a university; Texas Tech and the University of Texas offer such programs here in Texas, as does the University of Nebraska.
  
• "Core Curriculum" programs--which are mostly found in so-called 'inner city' environments--offer more of the type program defined by your professor.
  
• Public and most traditional parochial (e.g., Catholic) schools offer very broad curriculums designed for a wide range of student needs and abilities.
  
• Large numbers of private and more non-traditional parochial schools offer a more selective and challenging curriculum; such schools also usually require selective admission testing and application.
  
• Any 'good' school today, high schools especially, do offer a challenging variety of choices in meeting curriculum objectives...much like good colleges...and do seek to teach their students 'how' to think as opposed to 'what' to think.
  
• IMO, the national push to 'quantify' one's education through 'standardized' testing (as pushed by NCLB) is an educational disaster and is contrary to what scientific brain research has shown over the last two decades. In Texas, for example, students in kindergarten must take and pass a standardized skills test to enter 1st grade...which is wholly developmentally inappropriate practice. Texas has the TAKS (Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills) at specified grade levels, and public schools spend a lot of time teaching students to specifically take that one test vice just teaching them to think and process.
• A good book on this subject and college is titled "The Big Lie," the history of the SAT, which tested what was being taught in East Coast prep schools to keep 'westerners' out of the Ivy League and the resultant ACT to counter it. However, neither has proven to be a true indicator of how a student will perform in college.
  
• Another problem with schools today is the national obsession with 'ranking' our schools. One of the worst offenders is the US News national ranking of high schools--which most private college-prep schools refuse to participate in. And how do they determine the ranking? They take the total number of AP classes being taken by the school's entire student body and divide that by the number of seniors in the school. Yep...and the stats are provided by the schools themselves...and have nothing to do with how well the students perform on their AP exams, how many students begin AP classes and then drop them, etc. Can you see a problem here?
  
• The 'business' of educational assistive resources--as well as lobbying--has become HUGE and perpetuates the false idea that all it takes is $$$ vice 'teaching' to 'fix' our educational system...which, based on my experiences and in my opinion, is not nearly as broken as the MSM seeks to make us believe.

I could go on...and probably will if we get this thread started. Bottom line--this is America and America, as it always has, offers choice and opportunity, not guarantees.

FWIW, I, my wife, and my 3 sons are all products of a public school education because we believe in it and always sought to live where there were very good public schools...something we took seriously as being a part of our parental responsibility towards our childern.

Richard's $.025

[nmap]

Originally Posted by Richard

I could go on...and probably will if we get this thread started.

Sir, I hope the thread does get created.

I was unaware that homeschool students had a virtual classroom option - since online education is of particular interest to me, I have a particularly strong interest.

On Edit: I see the thread was created. Thank you!

[greenberetTFS]

What really scares the s**t out of me is that if BHO does happen to win. In the Supreme Court he will have as many as 4 potential openings to fill.

GB TFS