Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Reforming K-12 Education

By fyngyrz in Culture
Thu May 29, 2008 at 07:25:00 PM EST
Tags: education (all tags)

I am absolutely convinced that K-12 schooling is done all wrong. That's why it fails to consistently produce well educated people. I'd like you, dear reader, to consider the following set of suggestions. I'd like to specifically ask that you consider them in a holistic manner, that is, the ideas as presented taken as a whole, rather than trying to pick apart individual points before you've considered the entire presentation. Then — of course — let me have it right between the eyes.


I'd like to see six hours of schooling, broken into 45 minute segments, which gives you seven useful chunks of forty minutes and one of forty-five (lunch) presuming you need five minutes to transition between events. School should start at eight am and end at two pm. There would be no homework. There would be no sports. No drama. No clubs. No study halls. No trips. No art. No music. No dances.

These things are soft social issues, and as such, they should belong to the community, and be the responsibility of the community. Which — with no homework — young people might actually have the time and energy to participate in, organize, etc. I'm sure businesses would be just as enthusiastic at backing sports outside of school as they are inside. After all, they're the primary benefactors of sports programs. It certainly isn't the kids and their spleens.

I suggest those eight periods go as follows:

  1. critical thinking / debate / recognizing deceit
  2. math
  3. science (methodology) / sciences
  4. reading / comprehension
  5. writing / speaking
  6. Lunch
  7. history
  8. social studies / civics / life skills

That's a K-12 curriculum, BTW. At the 12+ point either specialization (such as technical training in one area... electronics, mechanics, furniture carving, plumbing) or long term educational undertakings with broader underpinnings would be considered.

Having disposed of the waste curriculum, freed up the kid's lives from parasitic, overweening trolls at the schools, who would have ZERO authority as to what the kid did outside the school, likewise ZERO authority to use what they did outside of school to treat them in any particular way IN the school, we come to the very serious question of how to teach effectively.

First of all, we're not all created equal. Let's get that nonsense right the heck out of the way. However, it is more than reasonable, not to mention fair, to say that we should all be offered equal opportunity, at least with regard to our education, which we're going to fund out of everyone's pockets in a manner that is as equitable as possible.

So everyone gets to start. Aptitude tests follow. You get into a class that proceeds at a rate the test seems to indicate you're good for. Excel, and you move to faster class next year. Those finish early and you spend fewer days in school. Too slow? Slower class next year; really too slow, not getting it? Repeat the year. Intentionally disturbing the class? Leads to expulsion; a couple of warnings first, then zot.

Now, a reality we have to face is that not only are some people sharper than others, there are some people who are simply not suited for desk time. For various reasons; some can be medicated to be (a parental choice), some can't. The world needs them, too — there are many jobs that require people of no particular skills, or at least far fewer skills than the person who designs your vehicle, anyway. So let them go if they want to go.

Conversely, if they want to come back, let them do that, too. At any age. Lose the entire idea that it is "normal" to be in a particular grade at a particular age. Decouple the social issues entirely; they should be there to learn, not to become king and queen of the prom. Make ageism as forbidden in K-12 as it is in a college.

If someone is having trouble and they don't want to go, provide an even slower program for them. Regardless of cost. I argue with great seriousness that the people who most need our assistance are not the ones we should choose to drop by the wayside.

Teachers: It isn't so much that you have to pay them a certain amount; it is that in order to motivate them, you need to couple their rewards to how well they do their jobs.

As a teacher, if your students achieve the norm for your class speed, you get your salary. That's what you were hired to do. If they overachieve — that is, excel at carefully randomized testing — you get a bonus. If they underachieve, guess what happens to next year's salary? That's right... it drops. Really screw up? You're fired.

Now, a key issue here is that the kids can use this as a weapon against the system, and the teacher. To avoid this, the kids also need to be motivated. So I suggest we pay them also. That's right, pay them for being students. They're investing time in something that will benefit society. So pay them.

If they reach average performance... they get regular pay. Excel, and they get a bonus. Underachieve... you know where I'm going with this already. Make sure they have concrete reasons of their own to do well. The up-front testing should ensure they are at the right speed so that average performance is achievable for them. The only risk I see here is sandbagging the entry tests to ensure the kid is placed too low; have to fix that with testing methodology; I would hope that's possible.

I also suggest that it is reasonable to break the subject matter into considerably more than twelve year-long chunks; this allows those who fall behind to fall less far, which could be of considerable benefit to them. Some people will slip up here and there, or simply have legitimate issues with a specific subject. This kind of arrangement helps them, and hurts no one else. Consequently, the more discrete levels in the system, the better.

So the student comes home at two pm, free of school issues until the morrow (or Monday) and they can then help around the house, work, study things of interest to them (art, music, cooking, learn Chinese... etc.), socialize, play sports, sprawl in front of the tube, get on the net, play video games, etc., ad infinitum.

Of course, I expect none of this, or anything like this, to happen, because of a peculiar pathology in the thinking of US citizens, businesses, and government. That is the "we want results right now, this quarter" pathology. They'll never actually invest a significant amount of anything in education because the results are too far out — twelve years — to motivate them.

However, I'm convinced it would work very well if tried. Like most advocates for specific change, I might add.

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Related Links
o Also by fyngyrz


Display: Sort:
Reforming K-12 Education | 173 comments (162 topical, 11 editorial, 0 hidden)
you've forgotten (2.40 / 5) (#5)
by achievingfluidity on Wed May 28, 2008 at 08:21:37 AM EST

the largest impediment to improving education...teachers' unions.

--
ANNOY A LIBERAL USE FACTS AND LOGIC


Not exactly. (1.50 / 2) (#7)
by fyngyrz on Wed May 28, 2008 at 08:38:08 AM EST

I just don't include unions in anything I think about; I think they're destructive to everyone they touch, sooner or later.

I also left out gym class, PTA, shop, etc... all on purpose. The school system is a victim of "we added stuff and it became less functional... so LETS ADD MORE STUFF! Same problem the government in general has.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

what kind of a stupid fucking comment is this (2.80 / 5) (#41)
by the77x42 on Wed May 28, 2008 at 08:10:34 PM EST

You know, because the way teacher's unions fight for  smaller class sizes and higher wages does nothing to help the poor kid who is in a class of 50 other dumbasses taught by a useless immigrant who couldn't give a fuck about his minimum wage job babysitting your hellspawn.

Once you realize that unions are the ONLY force opposing administrations that want to turn schools into factories, maybe you'll understand why they might be important. Until then, go fuck yourself and your anti-union propaganda.


"We're not here to educate. We're here to point and laugh." - creature
"You have some pretty stupid ideas." - indubitable ‮

[ Parent ]

Teacher's unions. (none / 0) (#93)
by vectro on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:34:47 PM EST

Wait, why does paying teachers more help the "poor kid" you mention if it's not tied to any kind of incentive pay? You still have the same teachers teaching the same material in the same crappy school. Doubly so if the pay raise applies only to teachers with seniority (commonly the case), because the higher wage doesn't even help you to hire more qualified people.

“The problem with that definition is just that it's bullshit.” -- localroger
[ Parent ]
what. (none / 0) (#104)
by the77x42 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 08:17:58 PM EST

first off, you increase the pay for one teacher, you increase it for all, that's the beauty of a union. the only caveat is if you are a substitute teacher, or you have a master's degree.

second, by increasing pay you increase job satisfaction. higher job satisfaction means that they will be willing to work harder for your kid. they don't mind staying the longer hours, they don't mind marking at home.

third, you attract more people to the industry, smart people who can use their skills elsewhere for (historically) more money.


"We're not here to educate. We're here to point and laugh." - creature
"You have some pretty stupid ideas." - indubitable ‮

[ Parent ]

No, that's totally wrong. (none / 0) (#110)
by vectro on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:48:54 PM EST

Public unions in general, and teacher's unions in particular, have shown a great willingness to sell new hires down the river in order to gain extra benefits for existing members. So no, extra money does *not* mean that everyone gets extra pay. Indeed, the place where the money would have an effect (on new hires) is precisely where it will not.

<P><A HREF="http://psychologytoday.com/rss/pto-20031006-000002.html">Salary minimally affects job happiness.</A> In your own life, would you go for the higher paying job even if it meant you had to spend 1/3 of your life in a crappier environ?

<P>Except you don't attract those people, because they're not the ones that get the benefit.

“The problem with that definition is just that it's bullshit.” -- localroger
[ Parent ]

Troof (1.50 / 2) (#49)
by Peahippo on Wed May 28, 2008 at 11:50:28 PM EST

All change in the environment of the public schools in the USA is stopped by the over-riding presence of not only unions for the teachers but also some for administrators. These fuckers are only going to demand pay and benefits increases, no matter what, and are certainly going to refuse to see their pay and benefits linked to the local economy or -- gadzooks! -- the testable performance of the students they produce.

No change is possible in any qualitative fashion until these unions are destroyed. The best way to do that is to allow the parents to choose private schooling ... which Americans are doing in droves, which only proves my implied point that unionized school systems in the USA are awful.

Now we must cue the outraged EIC member (education industrial complex) who cannot let such sense stand when somebody points out the perfectly clear facts of the failure of unionized school systems in the USA. The only thing that unionized school systems succeed at now is the sustaining of otherwise unsustainable pay and benefits. The pay of teachers alone should DROP to reflect not only the coming Depression, but also that their job is failing spectacularly, and further that with the advent of computers they are being replaced to an important degree.

The unions of teachers and administrators confuse job security with job preservation. Security from irrational treatment is meritorious. Preservation from rational adjustment is NOT.


[ Parent ]
you- me (none / 0) (#50)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Wed May 28, 2008 at 11:56:39 PM EST

high noon.  
choose your weapon.  

ok, actually, i'm busy at noon tomorrow. but i just want to say i think you are completely wrong.  unless of course you just want to spell the end of democracy.  

[ Parent ]

ObWeapon: 9mm Semiauto Pistol (1.50 / 2) (#51)
by Peahippo on Thu May 29, 2008 at 01:14:24 AM EST

Only a member of the EIC would equate unionized schooling with the "end of democracy". Your credibility is now SHOT.


[ Parent ]
the (3.00 / 2) (#56)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Thu May 29, 2008 at 07:56:07 AM EST

engineering institute of canada?
gosh peahippo. what does that have to do with anything

i equate school choice with the end of public education.  and if you support that you are supporting the end of public education because you are siphoning dollars away from public education.  then there goes your ability to govern the schools and to keep them in compliance with civil rights legislation, the ada, keeping religion out of schools, and with maintaining state and national standards of achievement. you don't even have the ability to make school be mandatory for all.   a whole host of woes.  

and you do all those things? and what do you have? you have private sector interests in control who can set their own rules. and pretty soon you have a lab setting for junior terrorists.  because you've got a bunch of angry, ignorant poor people.  

[ Parent ]

tautology at best (none / 1) (#61)
by anaesthetica on Thu May 29, 2008 at 12:39:14 PM EST

i equate school choice with the end of public education.

Please write and submit a k5 story arguing your case. It'd be good for the queue.

—I'm the little engine that didn't.
k5: our trolls go to eleven
[A]S FAR AS A PERSON'S ACTIONS ARE CONCERNED, IT IS NOT TRUE THAT NOTHING BUT GOOD COMES FROM GOOD AND NOTHING BUT EVIL COMES FROM EVIL, BUT RATHER QUITE FREQUENTLY THE OPPOSITE IS THE CASE. ANYONE WHO DOES NOT REALIZE THIS IS IN FACT A MERE CHILD IN POLITICAL MATTERS. max weber, politics as a vocation


[ Parent ]
tell you what- (none / 1) (#67)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:02:49 PM EST

when the summer comes and i have time to be doing something more than trading comments or putting up mindless diaries- i will try to get to it.  unless of course for some reason i actually get a life.  but there is not much chance of that happening.  

my one big problem with it however is that i do not know how to make something linky unless i put it at the end of what i type.  so someone will have to help me with that.  


[ Parent ]

Here you go: (none / 0) (#84)
by fyngyrz on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:05:40 PM EST

Links consist of three things; a URL, some readable text, and some very simple markup.

The URL is the thing in your browser's titlebar when you're on the site of interest. You can also lift them with most browsers by right-clicking (control-clicking on a 1-button mac) on an existing link and selecting "copy link location" or something similar.

The readable text is what shows up in your paragraph, nominally "click here" or "site name", etc.

The markup is the actual HTML, which doesn't often need to change from a very basic set of marks.

Here are some examples:

Markup guide: <a href="URL">readable text</a>

How to type an actual link: <a href="http://www.google.com/">click to visit Google</a>

What shows up in the article like this: click to visit Google


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

So you admit the public schools suck (none / 0) (#64)
by Just this guy on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:43:43 PM EST

"if you support [school choice] you are supporting the end of public education because you are siphoning dollars away from public education"

You concede people would leave in droves.

[ Parent ]

no dear (none / 1) (#66)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:58:53 PM EST

i am not admitting that.  

what i am saying tho is if you offer someone somthing shiny or something dull- they of course are going to pick something shiny.   without regard to whether there is something substative inside the wrappers or not.   without regard to whether there is something poisonous inside the wrappers or not.  

[ Parent ]

Why would people leave the public schools (none / 0) (#69)
by Just this guy on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:11:50 PM EST

in droves, "siphoning money away", unless they were better?

If you're saying that current citizens, themselves largely products of public schools, cannot be trusted to pick a school for their own children, that's a pretty damning indictment of the public school system itself.

Plus, unless you're planning to outlaw private education (and I'm sure many folks would), you're saying the rich deserve choice but the poor don't. Given the abysmal performance of poor public schools, you're eliminating any hope of people using education to get out of poverty.

[ Parent ]

i'm saying that whether you (3.00 / 2) (#70)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:30:56 PM EST

or i or anyone likes it, parents do not always make good choices and parents are not as much a reflection of public schools or the education they've recieved but rather just people of varying abilities to make decisions.   you are trying to draw a line, where i did not draw one and i don't even think it's fair to draw one.  

public schools, be they imperfect or whatever, do offer education to everyone.  private schools do not and would not even if the government sponsored them.  

the reason they would siphon money away if privatization of schools were subsidized by money is because then the money would follow the child.  
so ok, pretend we have a 1 room public school of 10 kids. a private school down the road offers "free to the student" education  because it's been privately and now publicly subsidized, and it has hired wonderful teachers and has wonderful facilities, it looks very attractive to the parents of the 7 of the 5 kids.  so the 7 leave the public school and go to the private school.  all is happy.  until two things happen- one, the public school can't afford to stay open and then the other 3 student are left scrambling for somewhere to go.  then next, say 1 of those 3 has a behavioral disorder, a physical disability or even just a religion that the private school doesn't cotton to.  then the private school is well within it's rights to say "nope, not gonna educate "that one."  
so now where are you gonna educate that one?  who's gonna do it? i suppose the government could come in and say "private school WILL educate this child"  but then the school ceases to be private, don't you see that?   if it has to follow the rules, in order to get the money, then it's not private anymore and it's not allowed to make up it's own rules.  

[ Parent ]

oops. 7 of the 10 (none / 0) (#71)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:34:08 PM EST

not 7 of the 5.  

[ Parent ]
Wait, let's do this again. (none / 0) (#92)
by vectro on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:32:55 PM EST

If the public school has to take on 1/3 of the students for 1/3 of the money, why exactly does that cause it to collapse? You're still looking at the same amount of funding per student.

Why, in your example, is there only one private school around? In the context of vouchers, should there not be options? Besides, universities are not allowed to discriminate on the basis of religion, why should high schools?

“The problem with that definition is just that it's bullshit.” -- localroger
[ Parent ]

Funding... (none / 0) (#101)
by fyngyrz on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:51:49 PM EST

...isn't only tied per-student; it is also per-instructor, per-class, per classroom. Heating costs pretty much the same no matter how many kids are in the room, cooling and lighting likewise. There's a definite urge to make the process efficient by maxing out the number of kids per these latter costs. If you don't, the cost per kid goes up simply because you can't manage those other costs well to respond to a drop in enrollment.

A school designed for smaller classes is better (in almost every way) but again, if your enrollment drops, building a new school won't be the first thing on the budget. :-/


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

i.e., there are fixed costs. (none / 0) (#111)
by vectro on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:52:33 PM EST

I think what you're saying is that there are fixed costs to running a school. Which is fair enough, there are fixed costs in any enterprise.

But that has nothing to do with nononoitaintmebabe's claim, because when you reduce the size of a school, you don't reduce the size of the classes, you reduce the number of classes. If you have extra classrooms left over (as, say, in Japan), you turn off the lights & heat, use them for storage, and/or rent them out (again, as in Japan).

“The problem with that definition is just that it's bullshit.” -- localroger
[ Parent ]

i used (none / 0) (#114)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:16:38 AM EST

a very simplistic example of there just being one public and one private school to try and make my point that sucking the funding out of one to give the other would harm the first one.  because there are expenses in running a school.  you have to pay the teachers, you have to heat the school, you have to maintain the building, you have to provide supplies and equipment. pay the janitorial staff etc.  

and i'm not sure what you are saying about the size reduction thing.  but what i'm talking about is that in a high school situation for example you would perhaps not have enough money to hire both an algebra teacher and an english teacher.

[ Parent ]

The point is for the money to follow children (none / 0) (#99)
by Just this guy on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:33:54 PM EST

The public schools otherwise have zero incentive to improve. You take for granted that the private school is able to hire better teachers and have better facilities with the same amount of money. The public school must change or adapt.

The alternative is to say that only the rich deserve to escape the crushing fail of public schooling.

[ Parent ]

no private schools (none / 0) (#115)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:29:29 AM EST

do not have the same amount of money.  they are either subsidized by a religion (such as catholic schools)  or by a corporation of some sort or by rich folk paying high tuitions.  then under your system, they would get the government money too.

and what i'm saying it would all be fine IF the private school had to accept everyone and live by the same laws.  but they don't.  and if they did- then they wouldn't be private anymore.  

and no i'm not saying that only the rich deserve to have a good education.  i'm saying exactly the opposite.  that everyone deserves an education.

i'm also not saying that there aren't things to improve in public education- but privatization of schools is just not the answer.  

what incentive do they have to improve? you might find this hard to believe but there are people in this world that just really want to do a great job at whatever they do. and there are people who truly care about other people.  and i see no reason why educators can't be like this.  and i believe the answer to making sure you get quality people in the education field is to offer a higher salary all around so that you have quality candidates to choose from in hiring and also to train adminstrators to recognize people who actually would be good teachers.  

[ Parent ]

You're sufficiently confused about the basic facts (none / 1) (#123)
by Just this guy on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 01:12:56 AM EST

that I don't think discussion is useful. Clearly schools need additional incentive to improve or they would already be improving. Inflation adjusted spending per-child has risen drastically yet public schools still suck. Public school teacher salaries are higher on average than private school teacher salaries, yet public schools still suck.

They suck for the same reason any near-monopoly sucks--there's no incentive to improve because they get their money either way. This doesn't mean individual teachers aren't good people (although union rules make it hard to fire incompetent teachers), it means there's no incentive to reduce administrative overhead, for example, because they have a captive customer base.

[ Parent ]

i don't think (none / 1) (#129)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 08:34:56 PM EST

i'm the one that is confused on the basic facts. but ok. we'll agree to disagree with that.  

i would argue that the reason private schools are more successful (although debatable) is because they do not educate everyone.  they don't get the kids whose parents do not or cannot see to it that they get 8 hours of sleep each night or help with their homework or basic nutrition.  they don't take the children that are disabled, except very selectively. they don't get or keep the children who are conduct disordered.  their classes are generally smaller so as to be able to devote more attention to individual children. many of them are allowed to teach and enforce a value system to children (they usually call it religion) which the public schools are not allowed to do.  

and my understanding is that at least locally here, their children are faring no better on state standardized tests than our public schools are.  and that's without the students that we are not allowed to turn away.  

also, i don't argue that public schools are perfect, but i will argue that any education is about as good as what the individual students put into it.  

i do not see tenure as a bad thing as i believe stability in a school staff to be a real asset to the educational system.  keeping children in a learning community where they know everyone has been proven to be a valuable thing (there is a lot of research on the effect of small schools and small learning communities that flies in the face of that my particular governor wants all of our school systems to be mega big to save money.)

i do agree that there has to be a better system put into place to get rid of poor teachers, but i also firmly believe that could be done even with tenure IF administrators were better trained to do their jobs.  

i still argue that we would have a better crop of teachers within a generation if pay were raised in general because there would be  more competition among teacher candidates to gain employment in the first place.  

as for incentives for a school to improve, i'm not real sure that any of the incentive programs that i've seen put into place have really done much besides "rearrange the chairs" on the ship deck, giving old things new names and calling it "good."   as far as market incentives go, that of a school going out of business if they don't measure up- well again i would argue that once you make the private sector schools deal with all of the students and all of the government regulations that the public schools have to deal with- that they will a. no longer be private schools and b. will suffer the same kind of woes eventually that the original public schools did.  and then, there you are again.  

[ Parent ]

You're a Union Stooge (1.00 / 2) (#107)
by Peahippo on Fri May 30, 2008 at 11:34:06 PM EST

No, the education industrial complex, you fucking goofball.

There was public education before unions took it all over, and there will be public education after the unions are rightfully destroyed.

You don't understand anything about personal liberty, and citizen empowerment. Please don't run for a public office. You're pure POISON.


[ Parent ]
No no (none / 0) (#62)
by Nimey on Thu May 29, 2008 at 01:55:58 PM EST

You boys should duel with penis fencing. I expect you're both well-practiced & it'd be an entertaining and informative spectacle.
--
Never mind, it was just the dog cumming -- jandev
You Sir, are an Ignorant Motherfucker. -- Crawford
I am arguably too manic to do that. -- Crawford
I already fuck my mother -- trane
Nimey is right -- Blastard
i am in complete agreement with Nimey -- i am a pretty big deal

[ Parent ]
um (none / 0) (#68)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:51:37 PM EST

i don't have a penis.

[ Parent ]
Er (none / 0) (#72)
by Nimey on Thu May 29, 2008 at 07:11:18 PM EST

Drat. Rather spoiled that troll.
--
Never mind, it was just the dog cumming -- jandev
You Sir, are an Ignorant Motherfucker. -- Crawford
I am arguably too manic to do that. -- Crawford
I already fuck my mother -- trane
Nimey is right -- Blastard
i am in complete agreement with Nimey -- i am a pretty big deal

[ Parent ]
just goes to show ya- (none / 0) (#73)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Thu May 29, 2008 at 07:19:35 PM EST

you should think before you troll.

[ Parent ]
Are you hot? $ (none / 0) (#78)
by Nimey on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:26:57 PM EST


--
Never mind, it was just the dog cumming -- jandev
You Sir, are an Ignorant Motherfucker. -- Crawford
I am arguably too manic to do that. -- Crawford
I already fuck my mother -- trane
Nimey is right -- Blastard
i am in complete agreement with Nimey -- i am a pretty big deal

[ Parent ]
no nimey- (none / 0) (#83)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:44:09 PM EST

i'm old.  
ask anybody.

[ Parent ]
That's okay (3.00 / 2) (#86)
by Nimey on Thu May 29, 2008 at 11:15:58 PM EST

Older women are more experienced.
--
Never mind, it was just the dog cumming -- jandev
You Sir, are an Ignorant Motherfucker. -- Crawford
I am arguably too manic to do that. -- Crawford
I already fuck my mother -- trane
Nimey is right -- Blastard
i am in complete agreement with Nimey -- i am a pretty big deal

[ Parent ]
Too bad the gov't won't go for it (2.40 / 5) (#8)
by Enlarged to Show Texture on Wed May 28, 2008 at 09:25:14 AM EST

The government wants bleating sheep who believe what you tell them and do what they are told to do. The last thing it wants its citizens to have are critical thinking skills and lessons on how to recognize deceit, because a population without such skills is critical in the maintenance of their political power...


"Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do." -- Isaac Asimov
shut the fuck up khallow (1.20 / 5) (#28)
by Ruston Rustov on Wed May 28, 2008 at 05:05:51 PM EST


I had had incurable open sores all over my feet for sixteen years. The doctors were powerless to do anything about it. I told my psychiatrist that they were psychosomatic Stigmata - the Stigmata are the wounds Jesus suffered when he was nailed to the cross. Three days later all my sores were gone. -- Michael Crawford
Maybe tomorrow. -- Michael Crawford
As soon as she has her first period, fuck your daughter. -- localroger

[ Parent ]
There are private schools (none / 0) (#118)
by Metasquares on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:12:43 PM EST

The government doesn't need to go for it for it to happen.

[ Parent ]
Not bad (3.00 / 4) (#9)
by Sgt York on Wed May 28, 2008 at 09:38:28 AM EST

At least you're realistic that it'll never happen. The only thing I disagree with is the exclusion of the arts (drama, art, music).

Those should be included as part of a good education; they may not be as important as literature, but they are important to warrant inclusion. You can learn a lot about history by studying the arts of a period. And you can learn a lot about the arts by actually doing them.

Another thing is unintended consequences. Think about what you're proposing with sports programs; follow that line of thought out for a decade or so. With how competitive some parents are already, it could open some very nasty doors. Yeah, having sports in schools comes with a heap of problems, but I don't think it would be better to just have it all just thrust out into the corporate sector like that.

There is a reason for everything. Sometimes, that reason just sucks.

More on that.... (1.50 / 2) (#21)
by fyngyrz on Wed May 28, 2008 at 04:26:56 PM EST

You can learn a lot about history by studying the arts of a period.

Of course. But that's just part of history. That's not trying to make the student actually learn to paint. When I say study history, I'm not leaving out anything — study what has happened. Everything. Wars. Religions. Art. Music. Science. Sootikins. Pograms. Witch burnings. Inventions. Systems of government. History is a rich tapestry from which I would subtract nothing, and from which I would hope people could take away as much as possible. Learn from history or repeat it; not mine, certainly, but as closely held by me as if it was.

However, I see no related need for students to be forced to sit in a schoolroom with watercolors, oils, clay or sticks. If they want to do that, by all means, do so at home or in a community center for the arts. It's not a life skill unless it is your specialization. Performing art(s) no more deserves a special exposure in a basic education than does performing sword swallowing, gem cutting or writing game software. Especially since performing art is a trivial thing, monetarily speaking, to pursue on one's own as a young person. There's no good justification whatsoever for including it in a basic curriculum. 99% of students aren't going to be artists; so why train them for it? Expose them to it by all means — history holds artists of all types up for examination with regularity — but train them? Pointless. If they love it, they'll go after it on their own.

For instance, I never played music in school; but I've played music outside of school for forty years now. That's because I feel a strong affinity for music. But that doesn't mean that every other kid should have been exposed to years of annoyance sucking on a brass instrument, figuring out the circle of fifths, or playing some gawd-awful arrangement of a 50's band tune for parents and kids who are 99% bored out of their minds.

Another thing: There's nothing saying that private schools that teach art couldn't take kids during the summer, or just off-hours during the year, and formally present the skills they're interested in.

A basic curriculum should provide the basic information one needs. Not the skills of specialists. It's not a job fair. It's a laying of foundations.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

I guess we disagree then (2.75 / 4) (#22)
by Sgt York on Wed May 28, 2008 at 04:33:59 PM EST

I think that art and music (as in, the familiarity with them and their use) is a basic skill. You can understand a lot more about how art expresses the personality of the artist when you've tried it yourself.

99% of the kids aren't going to be scientists. 99% of the kids aren't going to be mathematicians. And so on. It's part of a general exposure.

The vast majority of the stuff kids learn in school (even in your proposed curriculum) will have little or no impact on or use in what they do for a living. School is about making productive member of society, but "productive" goes beyond the monetary.

There is a reason for everything. Sometimes, that reason just sucks.
[ Parent ]

Hold on. (none / 1) (#30)
by fyngyrz on Wed May 28, 2008 at 05:26:57 PM EST

99% of the kids aren't going to be scientists.

If they don't understand science, they cannot understand the world. This is just another way of saying they are severely crippled. One does not have to "do" science to study it. I am not advocating labs for the purpose of discovery, only for demonstration of repeatability and the value of same. I am advocating exposure to how and why things work so one will have a good understanding of the world, which, in basic form, can be achieved in twelve years; I am advocating metal-glove level exposure to why the scientific method itself is presently the tool of choice.

99% of the kids aren't going to be mathematicians

Actually, 100% of them are going need to be mathematicians, barring early expiration or brain death. Correct change? Math. Budget? math. Interest? math. Mortgage? math. Grades? math. Taxes? math. Understanding taxes so as to vote with any degree of ability for informed consent? math. Bank accounts? math. Understanding voting? math. Discounts and sales? math. Understanding statistics? math. How old were you when such-and-such happened? math. Going to be a carpenter? math. Going to be an engineer? math. Going to be a finance whiz? math. Not to mention that huge numbers of other jobs have specific math requirements. Understanding science requires math. And if you don't understand science, that is, have a grasp of the current state of scientific knowledge, you're very likely to be some kind of negative influence on society [points soberly at creationists].

I have no trouble saying that any person who is incompetent in math is worth considerably less to society in general than they would otherwise be, because (a) they are less competent overall, and (b) others have to pick up the slack for them, and (c) they are far too easily manipulated by pendants and they subsequently become pawns.

And so on. It's part of a general exposure.

Art execution isn't general. Art appreciation is. History covers that. Music is art. Except, perhaps, when performed by a high school band, when I'd be more inclined — as a musician myself — to honestly describe it as pain. Because most of them don't want to be there for any reason having to do with music. They're looking to get out of something else, and have chosen music as the lesser evil; or they've got a crush on someone who is in the band; etc. Kids who are actually interested in music performance pursue it outside of school. And a good thing, too, or all our modern music would be off-kilter cacophony with vague roots in John Phillip Sousa's excremental offerings.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

Tactics shift? (3.00 / 3) (#47)
by Sgt York on Wed May 28, 2008 at 10:53:41 PM EST

You said that they would never use art, and I disagree with that. It is a very important method of conveying information. Doing it helps you learn how that communication works.

For example, I have found that people that haven't ever done any methods-based science have a very limited (if any) understanding of it. They have no concept of the nature of control or why science is so limited in its scope. This includes people who have been educated on the scientific method. Hell, many people think science is all-powerful and all-encompassing when in reality it is a subset of logic. I tell them that science owes its power to its limited scope and they don't believe me. Of course, it is hard for me to be objective about that.

I still stand by my assertion that the experimental practice of art is critical for a full understanding of it. And that the understanding of art is extremely beneficial to an understanding of humanity and history. And for those reasons, it has a place in education.

Granted, if you are forced to choose between math (or science, or art, or logic) or art, math is more crucial. I would never argue otherwise. Fortunately, we don't have to make that decision.

There is a reason for everything. Sometimes, that reason just sucks.
[ Parent ]

ok... (none / 1) (#81)
by fyngyrz on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:40:22 PM EST

I think studying art as an observer is sufficient to meet the personal developments you cite in general. So we'll just disagree here. I very much appreciate your thoughtful comments.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

You may keep your 6 hours on academics. . . (3.00 / 2) (#10)
by LilDebbie Lover on Wed May 28, 2008 at 10:15:44 AM EST

But you should add two or three more on arts and music, languages, and physical education or a mandatory homework time.  Full-time employment in the United States comes to about 8 hours per one day and there is no reason that full-time education can not match.

Signature of Disutility:
* Jedi Warrior Betrayal
* Emo Jedi Warrior Betrayal
* Betrayal of Aalya Secura
* Death of Spartan 117
* Enslavement of Man
* Humanity's Destruction
* Rise of the Horde

Also:
* "ALL I REQUIRE IS A PURPLE MARKER" ~LilDebbie
* "I'm straight but I like having sex with men" ~xC0000005
I think not. n/t. (none / 0) (#20)
by fyngyrz on Wed May 28, 2008 at 03:55:50 PM EST


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

It can, but why? (none / 0) (#119)
by Metasquares on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:15:25 PM EST

Are we sure that 8 hours is the optimal amount of time to spend in either school or work? I find the optimal amount of contiguous time to work closer to 6 hours, myself.

[ Parent ]
I don't believe 40 minutes on a subject, (none / 1) (#11)
by Calalily on Wed May 28, 2008 at 10:34:10 AM EST

especially Math, is enough time spent. Another approach, one I found to work well, is to not teach the subjects in seclusion of one another, but to rather have a contiguous flow, linking them all together. If that was done, then your approach might actually work, but as others have stated it should still include the arts and sports. I also believe we should get rid of the age barriers; however, you don't want a 12 yr old in class with a 6 yr old (safety issues)learning to read so maybe an age range, rather than none would be more appropriate.

We are maggots tunneling through a rotting corpse.
What safety issues? (none / 0) (#19)
by fyngyrz on Wed May 28, 2008 at 03:54:46 PM EST

I would agree we don't want students to act out, and ensuring that is a priority... but divergent ages are no more of a risk than divergent sexes, political opinions, etc. Discipline must be maintained, that's all.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

Little naive there? (none / 0) (#38)
by Kariik on Wed May 28, 2008 at 07:03:41 PM EST

Honestly. Put a 6 year old and a 12 year old in a confined space for a year, let me know what happens.

[ Parent ]
dicksucking? (2.50 / 4) (#46)
by Jobst of Moravia on Wed May 28, 2008 at 10:23:32 PM EST


---
              __
   .,-;-;-,. /'_\ ---Did this Negro say "Street Moor"?
 _/_/_/_|_\_\) /
'-<_><_><_><_>=\
 `/_/====/_/-'\_\
  ""     ""    ""

[ Parent ]

Honestly... (none / 0) (#80)
by fyngyrz on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:32:31 PM EST

Put them in the same space, keep them busy and well supervised, and nothing will happen. You're pitiful in your lack of vision, really.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

Wow (none / 0) (#58)
by Sgt York on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:51:47 AM EST

That statement is so incredibly naive as to discredit anything else you have said regarding children and education.

There is a reason for everything. Sometimes, that reason just sucks.
[ Parent ]

It took you until just then? (3.00 / 2) (#106)
by yuo on Fri May 30, 2008 at 10:01:52 PM EST

His naivety is blasted at you throughout the entire article.

I wish I had thought of pants pants pants pants pants pants pants pants.
[ Parent ]

FAIL (1.75 / 4) (#12)
by undermyne on Wed May 28, 2008 at 10:55:27 AM EST

Well intentioned enough but doesn't account for the fact that there are some genuinely stupid people (in fact, I would guess at least 30% of the population) that we be completely unable to function in this kind of structure.

The biggest problem in public education is the whole K-12 line of thinking. Any useless fucktard that thinks that all 8 year old kids are capable of learning at the same pace in all subjects is, well, a useless fucktard. Additionally, structuring grades so that in 4th grade everyone is learning the same math or language skill doesn't account for kids that might be ahead in one subject but behind in another. This generally leads to an overall poor educational experience because the student is left frustrated by the unreasonable expectations in one area of study while doing well in another.

Evidence of how badly the US education system fails: King George, the US Congress, and soon to be Barack Hussein Obama.

ray eckson - "nigger eggs are all yolk, you racist fuck"
Actually, it does. (3.00 / 2) (#18)
by fyngyrz on Wed May 28, 2008 at 03:52:07 PM EST

If you had actually READ it, you would know that there are paths for the slow, and paths for those who decline to participate, and re-entry paths for those who change their minds, and that penalties are not assessed for any of those.

But you didn't read it, so your opinion is worthless.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

True.. (none / 0) (#43)
by undermyne on Wed May 28, 2008 at 08:56:33 PM EST

but I didn't write it so Im not a fucking idiot.

ray eckson - "nigger eggs are all yolk, you racist fuck"
[ Parent ]
Intelligence DOES correlate (none / 0) (#120)
by Metasquares on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:21:18 PM EST

One of the principal observations behind the theory of IQ is that many forms of intelligence do in fact correlate.

I modded you down for the last two sentences, which were pointless non-sequiturs.

[ Parent ]

Here's how I see this going: (3.00 / 8) (#13)
by BottleRocket on Wed May 28, 2008 at 12:04:59 PM EST

In 13 years when the first batch of fully self-actualized philosopher-kings emerge from your flawless educational system, all speaking with perfect diction and fair-mindedness (and never out of turn), all the world's leaders will realize that they have done terrible wrongs to their fellow man and neighbor states and relinquish their positions to the new order. Everyone will get tax breaks and puppies.

Or, you could just be churning out a bunch of insufferable fyngyrz clones, all utterly failing to be ready for anything apart from cubicle work. It is clear that for one to be successful in your reformed grade school, a total lack of creativity will not go unrewarded.

$ . . . . . $ . . . . . $ . . . . . $
. ₩ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . *
$ . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Yes I do download [child pornography], but I don't keep it any longer than I need to, so it can yield insight as to how to find more. --MDC
$ . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
. . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . *
. ₩ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ . . . . . $ . . . . . $ . . . . . $
$B R Σ III$

Bzzzt. I'm not EVEN a cubicle person. Fail. (2.33 / 3) (#25)
by fyngyrz on Wed May 28, 2008 at 04:57:04 PM EST

You see, that's the problem with assumptions. You presume you know me from some written opinions of mine [wrong], draw some completely unjustified conclusions (such as creativity would not be engendered or rewarded within the described curriculum) [also wrong] and you proceed to stick your foot deep down your own throat. That funny taste is your toe cheese backing up on you. But thanks for trying to play. Next time, just for reference, the order is, [(1) think], then [(2) comment]. Notice there's no [(1.5) "assume"] in there. Also, normal positive integer ordering applies. You got that wrong, too.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

Sorry (2.60 / 5) (#39)
by BottleRocket on Wed May 28, 2008 at 07:16:53 PM EST

Almost qualified for cubicle work.

$ . . . . . $ . . . . . $ . . . . . $
. ₩ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . *
$ . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Yes I do download [child pornography], but I don't keep it any longer than I need to, so it can yield insight as to how to find more. --MDC
$ . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
. . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . *
. ₩ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ . . . . . $ . . . . . $ . . . . . $
$B R Σ III$

[ Parent ]

Silly Bottlerocket - it's not a cubicle (2.33 / 3) (#53)
by Wen Jian on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:09:11 AM EST

It's a Hugbox.
It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty
[ Parent ]
Implied lack of creativity (none / 0) (#117)
by Coryoth on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:17:24 PM EST

Come now, you have both students and teachers rewarded in purely cash terms for performance on, we can only presume, some quasi-standardised tests. Now, given the people who see cash as a primary motivation -- the reward in and of itself and the sole goal -- you can very reasonably expect teachers and students to cooperatively work together on bland memorization of facts required to pass the tests: that's the simplest and most efficient way to get the cash reward. Creativity is a non-starter in the face of such a system... well, there will be some teachers who go with that approach, but then they'll be the ones interested in actually teaching kids, and willing to suffer pay cuts for the odd bad year, rather than the type that are seriously motivated by simplistic cash reward schemes.

[ Parent ]
its all good (2.44 / 9) (#16)
by circletimessquare on Wed May 28, 2008 at 02:24:27 PM EST

except replace 6. Lunch, with phys ed

this fucking country is a fucking bunch of lard asses

i'm beginning to think they should make gastric bypass mandatory, or just shoot the fat fucks

its disgusting how fat americans are


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

Perhaps so. (3.00 / 3) (#23)
by fyngyrz on Wed May 28, 2008 at 04:43:57 PM EST

However, how fat — or not — other people are is not something I am willing to use to select them in or out as useful, interesting people. Further, it is well established that weight is not directly connected to exercise or eating in all people.

For example my diet is minimal, has been mostly vegetarian for years (I will eat eggs) and completely free of drugs or alcohol. My exercise routines put the vast majority of the population to shame — a minimum of ten hours a week, every week, as two hours a weekday of high-output martial arts, plus rock collecting and skiing and other activities on weekends — but I'm a heavy guy in spite of all that. Strong, yes; skinny, not even close. Not all that healthy, either, though definitely better since I quit the meat-eating.

My own opinion is that the day you see a nation of consistently svelte, lean citizens is only going to arrive a considerable number of days after they figure out how metabolism actually works and how to successfully mediate it. Something they're not even close to as yet.

Give kids two PM onwards, and the physically inclined among them will run around plenty because there will be lots of opportunity. The others won't; and that's just fine with me. Maybe they'll be artists, musicians, programmers, or professional gamers. Good for them.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

this country is fat, asshole (2.00 / 7) (#29)
by circletimessquare on Wed May 28, 2008 at 05:16:08 PM EST

i don't fucking care about the specifics of your fatness, good for you, you have a slow metabolism. here's a shiny medal for being a special snowflake. who fucking gives a shit you lardass

now shut the fuck up fattie and admit the fucking truth: this country is loaded with high carb meals and assholes who drive to their fucking mailboxes at the end of their driveways in their SUVs

in other words, THERE IS AN OBESITY EPIDEMIC. and it is disgusting, and it is simply because people are lazy and spoiled

slaughter them and feed them to the sudanese. fat disgusting mounds of self-entitled rich assholes. useless mounds of lard

The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

That's just a valueless rant, CTS. Worthless. n/t (none / 0) (#31)
by fyngyrz on Wed May 28, 2008 at 05:28:29 PM EST


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

valueless huh (1.50 / 2) (#34)
by circletimessquare on Wed May 28, 2008 at 05:40:26 PM EST

i guess you only go for value meals


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
Please explain the value of repeating rants (3.00 / 2) (#59)
by rpresser on Thu May 29, 2008 at 11:58:26 AM EST

that everyone has heard a few hundred times ... right here on K5, that is. Tens of thousands of times if you include the wider media.
------------
"In terms of both hyperbolic overreaching and eventual wrongness, the Permanent [Republican] Majority has set a new, and truly difficult to beat, standard." --rusty
[ Parent ]
easy: (none / 1) (#65)
by circletimessquare on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:39:57 PM EST

this country is in the middle of an obesity epidemic

that's a problem that needs to be addressed

one way you address that problem is you call lazy healthcare destroying lardasses what they are: lazy healthcare destroying lardasses. shame is a potent tool against the weak willed shortsighted herd of fat ungulates

and you enrage me, because in response to the obvious and real and huge healthcare crisis of fat lardasses in this country, you have the audacity to tell me you have a speical metabolism issue

oh really?! awww. you're a special snowflake. awww

#1: most probably, you're just rationalizing your lard ass weak willed poor behavior
#2: EVEN IF you have a special precious snowflake metabolic disorder: your commentary does not directly address, nor nullify, the very real obesity epidemic in this country. do you understand that point?

anything else i can help you with today you fat ass?

you and all you other lard asses: shame of this country. nothing but absolute shame. now go ride your scooter around walmart


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

FAIL (none / 1) (#90)
by rpresser on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:06:44 PM EST

a) I personally did not tell you anything about myself in this thread. I have never claimed to be "special" in any thread. you're mixing up your opponents.

b) Therefore any of your statements where you refer to me directly are completely ignorable, since you can't even keep track of whom you are talking to.

c) EVEN IF we ignore the above two points and the total failure of your ability to maintain coherence within a discussion, your repeated rants remain useless. The "shame" you speak of belongs to the lardasses whether you trumpet from the mountaintops or more wisely remain silent. Shame is something inherent; an asshole like you (and you ARE an asshole -- this has been proven in thousands upon thousands of K5 discussions) repeating rants adds nothing to the discussion, adds nothing to the perceived shame (since assholes can be ignored without affecting the real content of any discussion) and in fact your rants add nothing to anything except rusty's bandwidth and storage bills.

Anything else I can ignore from you today fathead?
------------
"In terms of both hyperbolic overreaching and eventual wrongness, the Permanent [Republican] Majority has set a new, and truly difficult to beat, standard." --rusty
[ Parent ]

yes, i am a ranting asshole (none / 1) (#94)
by circletimessquare on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:02:51 PM EST

i'm glad you have come to the dramatic realization i'm not a nice guy. i'm glad you think this realization is somehow important

that's really quite an amazing realization for you apparently

anyway: my point is, this country is in the middle of an obesity epidemic

100% true

anything else i can help you with today fucktard?


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

And just to pound the horse (none / 1) (#91)
by rpresser on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:08:57 PM EST

YOUR commentary ALSO does not directly address, nullify, enhance or in any way bear upon the "obesity epidemic" (horrible misnomer) in any country. Do you understand how thoroughly useless your rants are? They're not even entertaining anymore.
------------
"In terms of both hyperbolic overreaching and eventual wrongness, the Permanent [Republican] Majority has set a new, and truly difficult to beat, standard." --rusty
[ Parent ]
they apparently move you to respond (none / 1) (#95)
by circletimessquare on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:04:10 PM EST

but try moving a few more bowel movements, and maybe we can move this obesity epidemic along too

xoxoxoxoxoxox

fucktard

The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

Very well. (none / 0) (#96)
by rpresser on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:11:07 PM EST

"...it is rather disconcerting to be confronted with the
following theorem from [Baker, Gill, and Solovay, 1975].

Theorem 7.18  There exist recursive languages A and B such that
  (1)  P(A) == NP(A), and
  (2)  P(B) != NP(B)

This provides impressive evidence that the techniques that are
currently available will not suffice for proving that P != NP or
that P == NP."  [Garey and Johnson, p. 185.]
------------
"In terms of both hyperbolic overreaching and eventual wrongness, the Permanent [Republican] Majority has set a new, and truly difficult to beat, standard." --rusty
[ Parent ]

dude. there is an obesity epidemic in the usa (none / 1) (#97)
by circletimessquare on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:19:48 PM EST

what strange religion are you a member of that moves you to fight this simple obvious fact like a rabid creationist stuck in an elevator with darwin?

http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/

The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

Just like there's a cigarette smoking epidemic (1.50 / 2) (#98)
by rpresser on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:24:25 PM EST

Calling a widespread stupid lifestyle choice an "epidemic" is itself a stupid choice of epidemic proportions.
------------
"In terms of both hyperbolic overreaching and eventual wrongness, the Permanent [Republican] Majority has set a new, and truly difficult to beat, standard." --rusty
[ Parent ]
there is a cigarette smoking epidemic (1.00 / 2) (#102)
by circletimessquare on Fri May 30, 2008 at 05:13:44 PM EST

as in:

  1. it destroys your health
  2. it pollutes nonsmokers air

if people could smoke cigarettes without affecting healthcare budgets and without choking me every time i walk by the front of an office building, i would have no right or reason to complain. as it, i have to walk behind these fucking smoking assholes and choke on thweir shit, and pay for their lung biopsies. as such, i have a right to complain and condemn and shame

people who choose to turn into lard asses and smoke talk all about personal freedom and shrill nazis controlling their lifestyle. i agree with them completely about the rights of everyone to be free: i don't want people choking my air with smoke and i don't want to pay for the unhealthy habits of fat fucks and smokers

the lie you and other assholes who rationalize their poor behavior tell themselves is that their poor lifestyle doesn't affect anyone else. but it does. therefore, i have every right to get involved. who will pay for your healthcare? who has to breathe your stinking filth on the sidewalk?

understand reality yet you retard?

The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

you lie and you know you lie (3.00 / 2) (#122)
by rpresser on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 12:10:07 AM EST

you don't "have to pay for their lung biopsies." You choose to pay for health insurance. You choose to remain in a country where some health insurance is paid for by taxes. You choose to pay those taxes. You could choose to avoid paying healthcare, to avoid paying taxes, or even leave the country.

You don't enjoy your choices? Tough.

I agree with you completely about the rights of everyone to be free: I don't want liars choking the Internet with foul language and I don't want to pay for the unhealthy habbits of fappers and liars using up all the bandwidth.

The lie you and other assholes who supremacize their own thinking tell themselves is that their choice is the only right one and nobody who disagrees can possibly be allowed to speak. But they can. Therefore, I have every right to smoke in your face. (Though in fact I do not smoke, not that you'd have the slightest intention of asking or attempting to find out the truth.)

I pay for my own healthcare, and my wife's. I leave no stinking filth on the sidewalk -- whereas I have to read the stinking filth you leave all over Kuro5hin.

It will be a very happy day when I finally read of your untimely death -- which will very likely occur long before my own. Rest assured that I will seek out and dance on your grave.
------------
"In terms of both hyperbolic overreaching and eventual wrongness, the Permanent [Republican] Majority has set a new, and truly difficult to beat, standard." --rusty
[ Parent ]

pick up a newspaper friend, any newspaper ;-) (none / 1) (#124)
by circletimessquare on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 03:43:21 AM EST

its a regular drumbeat, every day, more restrictions on smokers "rights" (ie, more rights for non smokers)

oh look, here's a random gem:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1970653/posts

you can't smoke in your private condo. aw shucks

oh, look at the purty posts attached to this gem, the posts the common average man on the street. look which way the common consensus rolls... in my direction, or yours? ;-)

shucks, its as if no one wants to smell this shit, as is their natural right

(snicker)

as you wait out your days, keenly looking forward to that dance on my grave, you shall see more stories like this one every day. every day you pick up the paper, or i scroll to a news site, there's another little gem like this, ever marching forward, evere constricting the "rights" of smokers. until they have none

every day that passes leaves you with more disdain, and fills this asshole's heart with more pride, as another city council or town meeting ends with a law in my favor, and against yours ;-)

see, it is not me you who you hate- which is a shame for a proud asshole like me who revels in such hatred as you display. unfortunately, i cannot claim your hatred for me as well deserved. because what you really hate is the common sense of millions of your fellow citizens. who all increasingly agree with me, and all increasingly pass laws that favor my opinion

funny that, huh? ;-)

"You choose to pay for health insurance. You choose to remain in a country where some health insurance is paid for by taxes. You choose to pay those taxes. You could choose to avoid paying healthcare, to avoid paying taxes, or even leave the country."

it's amazing how you channel the founding fathers with those sage pieces of wisdom. i choose to pay taxes? quick! get me wesley snipes on the phone! (snicker) such a cunning grasp on reality and logic you have ;-P

or not

the laws in this country are swinging in MY direction friend, not yours, and you smokers are a vanishing breed. why is this? the end times? the fall of western civilization? OR JUST COMMON FUCKING SENSE, THAT CLASHES WITH YOUR LOW IQ SELFISHNESS YOU FUCKING CRETINOUS PRICK

finally, dear great genius: since you do seem to smoke (you may not, but your venom seems mighty focused on this issue), it is nothing but statistical inevitability that the one dancing on the other's grave will be me. on yours

enjoy your menthol ;-)

every day and every development in the dawning common sense on smoking brings me more pleasure, and you more disdain. and you more carcinoma. its a shame i cannot claim your hatred as my hard deserved work. it is not me you hate. is everyone around you. they all agree with ME. ah, sweet democracy

ps: i won't be dancing on your grave. you just don't interest me that much. low iq selfish pricks like you are a dime a dozen. sorry, but you're too common, you're just not that interesting

xoxoxoxoxoxox


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

My venom is focused only on you (none / 1) (#125)
by rpresser on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 09:41:28 AM EST

and any issue you seem to support would have drawn it forth.

If you'd actually read what I posted, you'd see (Though in fact I do not smoke, not that you'd have the slightest intention of asking or attempting to find out the truth.)

Your reply proves me correct.
------------
"In terms of both hyperbolic overreaching and eventual wrongness, the Permanent [Republican] Majority has set a new, and truly difficult to beat, standard." --rusty
[ Parent ]

really, so you're like my pet? (none / 1) (#127)
by circletimessquare on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 10:11:07 AM EST

does my ass really smell that minty fresh you have stick your head up it? the issues don't matter, just hating me does?

it's kind of endearing actually. awww. i have a sycophantic puppy dog folliwing me around. how cute! ;-)

go fetch fucktard!

xoxoxoxoxoxox


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

By this reasoning, you have no right to smoke pot (none / 0) (#131)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:20:31 AM EST

You're so fucking stupid you're not even consistent.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]
use your brain retard (none / 0) (#132)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:55:51 AM EST

  1. cigarette smoking occurs many times a day, smoking pot occurs once or twice a week. no one is smoking joints, or ever will smoke joints, at the rate that cigarette smokers need to shove nicotine into their brains. simply because the effective dose and the length of that effective dose of thc isn't anything remotely like the quick shots of nicotine that cigarettes deliver and then quickly fade. so the toxicity of weed smoke is many orders magnitude below that of cigarette smoke, simply on the amount of lung exposure one gets via normal weekly use of cigarettes versus joints. so the health expenditure issue isn't even comparable. weed smoke is comparable to diesel fume exposure living in a major city. cigarette smoke is HUNDREDS AND THOUSANDS OF TIMES MORE EXPOSURE

  2. however, weed smoke is PUNGENT SHIT. indeed, you have no right to smoke that shit in public. you have no right to stink up other people's lives, just like with cigarette smoke. you have to smoke it in private, but even then you can smell that shit through walls in other apartments, so yeah, smoking weed is doomed in terms of public acceptance. public acceptance: do ou understand the need to embrace that concept to get some drugs legal dear clueless asocial idealist? or do you thinking telling the general public that they have to smell cigarettes and joints is going to win you anything but hostility? no, I DON'T HAVE TO SMELL THAT SHIT. who says? ANYONE WHO DOESN'T SMOKE THAT SHIT AND DOESN'T LIKE THE SMELL. who is that? THE FUCKING MAJORITY. DUH. feel free to yell at the majority who don't want to smell that shit. yeah, you're a fucking poster child for winning greater drug acceptance (snicker)

  3. nicotine and thc can be delivered to the body in ways besides smoking. the effect is two-fold: no lung toxicity for the smoke, so i don't have to pay for your chemotherapy, and there is no smoke to smell, so you can be a nicotine fiend or a thc fiend, it has no effect on my life. therefore, thc and nicotine use, in any other delivery method besides smoking, is something i wholeheartedly endorse and accept and promote. see how that works?: consistency on the issues. the issues are not wanting to smell the smoke, and not wanting to pay for lung cancer. so if you get thc or nicotine into your body another way then, by complete reason and logic and respect for the freedoms of other people, no one has a right to defy the use of thc and nictoine. so that has to be the future. its the only one of mutual respect. so go research alternative delivery methods. go become a legal drug lord billionaire procrasti


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
You are wrong from the start (none / 0) (#133)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:16:58 AM EST

Some people DO smoke joints as if they were cigarettes... Don't be so naive.

The only point we agree on here is that no matter what you do, you have no right to affect others around you... be that smoking in their space, smoking around people in public or even smoking in your apartment if the smoke goes into other peoples apartments.

None of these are reasons to ban SMOKING... If I wanted nicotine I'd use a patch... no.. I want to SMOKE... so SMOKE I SHALL.

The only right you have is not to be directly affected by what I do... and your only complaint in that direction is the so called health issues.... ITS AS IF YOU BELIEVE THAT HEALTH INSURERS DIDN'T HAVE A WAY TO ADJUST THEIR PREMIUMS BASED ON YOUR LIFESTYLE!!!!

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

dude: no one smoke joints like cigarettes (none / 1) (#134)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 10:07:35 AM EST

"Some people DO smoke joints as if they were cigarettes"

no one does. the biopharmacology of the drug's duration and effects on the body are completely different. completely different psychosocial context as well

so if you wish to actually represent that as a statement of yours, then you've utterly lost any claim to competency on the subject matter to attempt to speak intelligently on it
 

The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

I do... so fuck you $ (none / 0) (#135)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 10:08:58 AM EST



-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]
heavy smoker do more than 15 cigs a day (none / 0) (#136)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 11:17:50 AM EST

you smoke more than 15 joints a day?

you need to up the quality of your joints dude, seems like your smoking filler. low quality weed, should have expected it from you

(snicker)


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

I smoke > 4.5g of Silver Haze a day... (none / 0) (#137)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 11:28:54 AM EST

So
  1) yes, I smoke more than 15 joints a day, and
  2) You've NEVER smoked better weed

Your problem is that you think people should be like you. Do things you like to do and nothing else. If they do something unhealthy (that you don't do) then they are wrong...

In fact, you are wrong... The very basis of your mentality is wrong. Nothing could be worse than the world you want... unless you are a mindless drone (oh i see...).

Your thought process would lead to compulsary exercise clinics for adults... cause anything less will cause an increase in health costs... Its stupid and has no moralistic basis outside of communist/fascists states.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

i was wrong (none / 0) (#138)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 11:51:14 AM EST

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070731085550.htm

joint smoke is badderest than cigarette smoke

so enjoy your mesothelioma. and it is your god given right i pay for your treatment of that, right?


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

So, now you are saying that people shouldn't be (none / 0) (#139)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 11:57:35 AM EST

allowed to smoke weed? Did I hear that right? Cause that would be consistent with your fascist attitudes (except that you also smoked it and therefore want an exception, right?).

Yes... its BAD for you... Adults have the right to do things that are bad for them... that's what being an adult is about -- no, I don't expect you to understand, that's also an adult thing.

I expect my health insurer to pay for my health costs, that IS what I pay THEM for... what the fuck that has to do with you, dear retard, I can only guess.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

well that's easy for you to say (none / 0) (#140)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 12:21:49 PM EST

you accuse me of being a fascist and a hypocrite

and yet you're angry at me because i don't want to pay for your bad health choices

got it

oh, and btw: there is a post above this one, in which i fully endorse nicotine and thc use, as long as it isn't smoked, so i don't have to smell it and pay for the lung biopsies. are you clear on that? or am i just a hypocritical fascist because the words sound good, even though i didn't say or do anything fascist or hypocritical. like, you know, expecting someone else to pay for their bad habits?

you're so low iq

http://medicolegal.tripod.com/cost.htm

Bottom line: Each pack costs society over $7.18 (medical) + $7.18 (drugs) + $40.38 (crime), >total $54.74, in damages.

Smokers may pay about $2 - $7 per pack tax. What they don't pay, you do.

You non-smokers, rather, we non-smokers, pay the remaining tab of about $47.74 - $52.74 per pack--a $50 bill + up in smoke, each pack!

If you feel that inflation (reduced value of your money, in terms of lower pay, benefits or purchasing power) is caused, deliberately caused, not accidental, you are right.

Calculate your state's share of the total costs:
$157.4 + 160 + 900 billion = $ 1217.4 billion for U.S.A.
Your average state's share per year $1217.4 billion / 50 = $ 24.348 billion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compare with your state's alleged "tobacco settlement money."
Michigan example: $8.7 billion over 25 years = $348 million per year.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ask yourself: How much is tobacco costing Michigan each year?:
Answer: $24.348 billion - $.348 billion = $24 billion a year loss!
Yeah, right, there's a "settlement"!
That alleged "settlement" is at about a 1 to 70 ratio,
for each $ 1 in "settlement" money,
Michigan pays, no, YOU pay out about $70 in new tobacco-related costs!
Now do you understand why the budget deficit?!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residents of other states can do similar calculations.

Don't be scammed by tobacco lobby claims that researchers don't know how to do statistics! The statistical method to make analyses has been known since the 12th century.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The nation and all states and you, you massively lose, lose, lose, on tobacco. The near $54 per pack cost massively devastates each state's budget and promotes inflation. Instead of $$ billions, $$ tens of billions in the bank, in the "rainy day fund," they may be next to nothing!



The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
Can't you fucking read?? (none / 0) (#141)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 12:41:56 PM EST

You DON'T pay for my health insurance.... I DO...

And if that still doesn't make sense... Lets try a recap for you:

ITS AS IF YOU BELIEVE THAT HEALTH INSURERS DON'T HAVE A WAY TO ADJUST THEIR PREMIUMS BASED ON YOUR LIFESTYLE!!!!

I don't know where the article you linked gets those numbers from -- but the majority comes from ...... CRIME? WTF, cigarette related crime is 80% of the health costs of smoking... your links are even more retarded than you...

But, lets look at another example:

Smoking kills, as we know. It costs the NHS a small fortune - up to £1.7 billion annually - to treat smoking-related diseases such as cancer, bronchitis and other side-effects such as cardio-vascular disease.

...

The end result is that tobacco taxation, the amount levied in various ways by the government on every packet of cigarettes, cigars or smoking tobacco, comes to £12 billion per year, six times more than any NHS bills run up by nicotine addicts.

And I will repeat again... if I wanted nicotine I would use a patch... I don't... I WANT TO SMOKE. My health is NOT YOUR CONCERN... get over it.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

apparently you don't know how insurance works (none / 0) (#142)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 01:00:02 PM EST

it pools risk into categories. your smoker's premium doesn't represent a to-the-dime extra charge for the extra health stupidities you suffer, it just represents a risk adjustment. meanwhile, you and your cohorts are taxing our health care system to a greater extent, and us nonsmokers are supplementing the cost to cover your asses. i AM paying for your bad habits. and as such, i get a fucking say in how you behave. got that?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11394043/

don't like that? don't use community health insurance. pay everything out of pocket. or shut the fuck up. you lose the argument moron: if you use more of a community resource, the community gets to decide things for you. that's the way the real world works asshole. you can't pretend to be an island whose behavior affects no one when it clearly costs us. you can't expect us to pay for your stupidity and then get all huffy when we want to limit your stupidity. it simply means you are selfish and don't understand how your poor choices hurt others

i'm a fascist? nah. you're just a selfish prick. a selfish prick WOULD call some fascsit just for making prudent expectations of adjustments on your behavior because it costs us. not because that person was a fascist, but just because the selfish prick has no awareness of how his choices hurt others. it looks like fascism to a selfish prick

luckily, you might have noticed a strong trend in this country against smoking. because we who pay for you selfish pricks hav enoticed the drain in our pocketbooks, and we will smack some common fucking sense into your selfish stupid mind. capisce fuckwad?

The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

You are making some mistakes... omg, surprise (none / 0) (#143)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 01:20:27 PM EST

I know how insurance works, I've even been in the industry (working on web apps to automate applications)...

The US system, where health insurance is provided by employers, is broken from the start... but in capitalist societies, actuaries ensure that each risk category pays its own costs plus profit... so there is no way my lifestyle costs you in a private system.

And, once again, in sensible countries... the TAX on cigarettes offsets the socialised costs. The fact that I am taxed to cover the health costs..... wait for it.... ENTITLES me to those benefits. Neither have you been deprived of anything.

All you are telling me is that they don't tax cigarettes enough over there.

Raising taxes is one thing, but your instinct to ban everything is fascist. The fact that you argue for pot (and think no one is going to smoke it) while banning smoking it, is even more retarded.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

i supplement your coverage moron (none / 0) (#144)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 01:29:39 PM EST

its one vast insurance pool. if it were isolated to your costs, it wouldn't be insurance you fucking moron, it would be called out of pocket. thats the only case in which money doesn't go from my pocket into your COPD oxygen tank. any type of insurance or socialized anything ropes us together in terms of money in/ money out. why am i educating you on the simple basics retard? if the $ comes out of my pocket, i expect to have a fucking say on how the $ is spent. is that fascist enough for you fucktard?

furthermore, EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO ALL THE THC AND NICOTINE THEY WANT. that's the third time i said it. because i'm a giant fascist, right?

but i don't want to SMELL the shit. here, oh great wise one, step into my demented mind and edumacate me: on what basis do i resist having to SMELL YOUR SMOKE? some sort of fascist instinct of mine? please inform me of my vast controlling fascist desire not to smell your smoke

such a selfish low iq prick

The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

Health insurance DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY (none / 0) (#145)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 01:49:34 PM EST

except probably in the US...

Everywhere else it is a QUESTION ON YOUR APPLICATION FORM -- DO YOU SMOKE MOTHERFUCKER? HOW FUCKING MANY?.... YOUR MONTHLY INSURANCE FEE IS ${LOTS_MORE_FOR_YOU_FILTHY_SMOKER} (note: your insurance will be void if you supply false information)

Its averages... ON AVERAGE.. smokers cover their OWN costs in the extra premiums they pay on their insurance.

Same with the TAXES on the thing SMOKED.

The only thing we agree on is that I should not be able to smoke around non-smokers... I'd even go as far to say you could make an assault charge out of it.

Banning SMOKING (in all cases) is the fascist thing... no matter if its thc, C17H21NO4, nicotine.

So, it turns out I was wrong, what I though was you being inconsistent was just you being a fucking retard... in your imaginary world, where everyone could grow and get weed whenever they liked and no one would smoke it. Right...

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

i supplement smoker's health costs (none / 0) (#146)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 02:07:44 PM EST

it is not self-funding. that's just financial reality. go to google, i'm done with you on this point

http://www.alliedquotes.com/Resources/Health-Insurance-Rates.html

furthermore there is:

  1. noninsured smokers to pay for (not through insurance but via my taxes)
  2. nonsmokers who get health effects from second hand smoke (waitresses, etc.)
  3. smokers who quit, now pay insurance as nonsmokers, but still have a health effect
  4. smokers who lie on their health insurance
etc.

i pay for smoker's health costs. i do. it's as plain as a brick wall, except to stubborn selfish assholes such as yourself. i get a say in how you behave, because i help PAY for how you behave. do you understand that? or do you still wish to imagine your bad choices have no effect on me and i'm just a fascist who doesn't want to pay for your stupidity? i find it cheaper to force you to behave another way. i don't get to do that? i have to support your bad choices? i don't get to choose not to support your bad choices? who's forcing who then?

sorry, i'm such a fascist, not wanting to pay for the bad health effects of you cigarettes. gosh, what a fascist i am for not recognizing your higher aristocratic class i am duty bound to support financially. man, i'm such a jack booted thug

but you've conceded on the smoke, which is kind of shocking and big of you. amazing. thank you procrasti

but you should realize something:

  1. you can smell smoke through apartment walls
  2. you can smell it on the street, and in parks

such that indeed, entire cities in the usa are instituting city-wide bans on smoking. in a few years, you will only be able to smoke in the middle of a cornfield. and then only without any witnesses

and there's nothing fascist about that all, because real fascism is expecting other people to choke on your smoke

the edumacation of procrasti proceeds, you conceded a point. fucking hell has frozen over

now get to work on delivering thc and nicotine without smoke. there's $ in it

The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

Exactly what point did I concede? (none / 0) (#147)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 03:03:57 PM EST

From my second post here- The only point we agree on here is that no matter what you do, you have no right to affect others around you... be that smoking in their space, smoking around people in public or even smoking in your apartment if the smoke goes into other peoples apartments.

Like I said BEFORE, the US health insurance system is broken... The link you sent proves it... Employers are the primary provider of health insurance and I think that distorts the risk allocation. When its bought individually, the insurance companies directly charge you more for bad lifestyle choices.

But, Insurance charges on smokers and taxes on smoking SHOULD cover ALL the costs (poor smokers health care, ex-smokers health too) and can even provide a little extra -- hooray!!. The legal system covers fraud, and your only other example (ex-smokers) can also be covered by in the same way.

So forget the 'oh god, poor liberal me, I can't help everyone and pay for all their vices too' mentality -- the definition of Liberal Fascism -- the cost aspect of any activity CAN AND SHOULD be covered by both taxes and insurance premiums.

People can smoke in specially conditioned rooms, detached houses, smoking bars, smoking parks, smoking beaches... maybe not everywhere...

Oh, yes... they already have nicotine patches, gum and nicotine fake cigarettes and crap like that...

so why are there still smokers?

pure nicotine is very dangerous stuff.

Again... you can take your dope however you like, but why do so many smoke it?

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

amazing (none / 0) (#148)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 03:38:52 PM EST

"the cost aspect of any activity CAN AND SHOULD be covered by both taxes and insurance premiums"

what if society doesn't approve of the activity?

you expect society to pay for that which it doesn't want to pay for. how do you do that procrasti? voodoo?

moron: "hi, i smoke. pay for my COPD"

society: "howabout we just prevent you from smoking"

moron: "that's fascist of you"

society: "its fascist to force someone to do something they don't want to do. well, we don't want to pay for your habit. so who's the fascist?"

got it fucktard?


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

you're boring me (none / 0) (#149)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 03:57:57 PM EST

moron: "hi, i smoke. pay for my COPD"

insurance company: "here's the money we charged extra on your insurance for smoking, or die"

society: "hold on, here's the money we taxed from you for smoking, and you're behind these nonsmokers in the line"


-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

dude. nonsmokers supplement that $ (none / 0) (#150)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:11:10 PM EST

and make up for those who don't have insurance, lie, stopped smoking, 2nd hand smoke sufferers, etc.

this is the 3rd time i've pointed this out

how i can bore you if you don't even listen?


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

I answered that already $ (none / 0) (#151)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:12:11 PM EST



-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]
answered with a lack of understanding of reality $ (none / 0) (#152)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:21:20 PM EST



The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
The answer: (none / 0) (#153)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:23:51 PM EST

You tax the vice enough to cover ALL THOSE COSTS, and you differentiate the health insurance to cover ALL THOSE COSTS.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]
like i said, a lack of understanding of reality (none / 0) (#154)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:31:36 PM EST

in REALITY, the extra insurance smokers carry doesn't cover the extra costs smokers incur

such that i, society, we nonsmokers, we supplement the healthcare costs for you to smoke

simple enough for you fucktard?


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

In the US... in the UK taxes cover costs 6x over $ (none / 0) (#155)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:45:16 PM EST

Rather than let a minority pay the cost of their own actions (on average), you would ban it, there's no need.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA you champion the UK!? (none / 0) (#156)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 05:12:11 PM EST

this is the system you champion mr. john stuart mill?!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article2859623.ece

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

Yes, there are people like you everywhere :( (none / 0) (#157)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 05:19:52 PM EST



-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]
i don't want to pay for other's bad behavior (none / 0) (#158)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 05:47:04 PM EST

apparently, you're the one championing a system that controls bad behavior AND asks you to pay 6x for the bad behavior

pfffft

enjoy

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

I just said its possible to tax it, and take a (none / 0) (#159)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 06:08:22 PM EST

little bit extra for society too... FOR EXAMPLE the uk

does not mean I think the uk is perfect... k

where the fuck is perfect? The problem is that everywhere there are people like you who go beyond the first bit in order to fulfill their instinctual desire to have control over other people's behaviour.

As long as its one minority or another, everyone thinks its great... eventually it affects everyone. If you really want to ask where all your money is going (that you're beginning to feel it in your purse) I can tell you its not smokers.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

i have no desire to control other peoples behavior (none / 0) (#160)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 06:28:45 PM EST

unless that behavior negatively impacts me

i don't care what the hell happens in other people's houses, unless they ask me to pay for what goes on in those houses

why do you think this is a situation of brave defender of innate freedom against a compulsive control freak? when it is more accurate to describe the situation as blind selfish twit unawaers of how his behavior impacts the people around him?

the question is, why does your selfishness blind you as to the effects of your behavior on others?

your accusation of fascism is inaccurate

it is more accurate to say that you are selfish

which is an old and obvious fact about you

zzz


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

You'd prohibit even when it doesn't affect you $ (none / 0) (#161)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 06:32:28 PM EST



-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]
i would not prohibit it if it didn't affect me (none / 0) (#162)
by circletimessquare on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 07:48:37 PM EST

any other baseless bullshit you want to fling at me? or would you like to argue with the monsters in your head on your own? seeing as you are arguing with positions that i have nothing to do with


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
given the choice of taxing or prohibiting (none / 0) (#163)
by procrasti on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:13:28 PM EST

you chose to prohibit

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]
yes, because that way (none / 0) (#164)
by circletimessquare on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 06:00:18 AM EST

I'M NOT TAXED FOR SOMETHING I DON'T DO

DUH

why are you such a fascist, insisting i financially support your retarded lifestyle?


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

What? You aren't taxed if you don't do it... (none / 0) (#165)
by procrasti on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:44:03 AM EST

taxes on cigarettes not stupidity.

wtf are you retarded?

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

i'm taxed (none / 0) (#166)
by circletimessquare on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:48:30 AM EST

every time i walk by a smoker

i'm taxed every time a smoker smokes black market cigs

i'm taxed every time a smoker quits but health effects linger

i'm taxed every time someone gets second hand smoke effects

i'm taxed every time a smoker lies on his taxes

i'm taxed for every smoker who doesn't pay taxes

etc. etc.


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

boring troll is boring (none / 0) (#167)
by procrasti on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:57:30 AM EST

raise the taxes on cigarettes to cover those socialised costs and fine the individuals smoking in the wrong areas.

No cost to you.

deja vu?


-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

ok (none / 0) (#168)
by circletimessquare on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:45:21 AM EST

how much does my fatal lung cancer from second hand smoke cost?


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
You can sue for assault before you get it (none / 0) (#169)
by procrasti on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 02:17:10 PM EST

and you (and/or your health insurer) could sue for damages once you did get it...

Nothing that can't be covered under the existing system - just requires recognising the harm smoke can do to others, and I think that's been done.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

and since the harm is recognized (none / 0) (#170)
by circletimessquare on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 05:40:49 PM EST

then, like any crime against someone else's liberty, it can be outlawed

glad you've finally come up to speed retard ;-)


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

No, it shouldn't be outlawed (none / 0) (#171)
by procrasti on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 05:59:30 PM EST

just that the smoke should not be allowed in general public space or to escape your residence unfiltered.

Its not a harm until it you are exposed to it.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

Welcum 2 mai Aspie Factuhree... (3.00 / 7) (#17)
by Wen Jian on Wed May 28, 2008 at 02:43:53 PM EST

9/10 Kurons will applaud your idea.
It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty
Do you seriously contend... (none / 1) (#24)
by fyngyrz on Wed May 28, 2008 at 04:47:44 PM EST

...that 5.25 hours of reality-based practical education a day would create a bunch of people with Asperger's syndrome?

It seems to me that you're making assertions for which there are no facts in evidence.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

"reality-based" (3.00 / 4) (#36)
by Vampire Zombie Abu Musab al Zarqawi on Wed May 28, 2008 at 06:04:38 PM EST

as in "reality", according to aspies.

[ Parent ]
Failure to comprehend 'Subjectivity' (none / 1) (#52)
by Wen Jian on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:07:24 AM EST

CHECK
It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty
[ Parent ]
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW (1.08 / 12) (#32)
by ray eckson on Wed May 28, 2008 at 05:31:54 PM EST

FYNGYRZ CAN SUCK A COCK


wampsy: hey ray why don't you start up a site. you could call it ray5.
rusty: I gotta fix that stupid cancel bug.
booger: How's that for daring to get ray eckson all sniffy, you cow?
poopy: Not that I'm gay or anything, but for you I might make an exception.
A spammer *and* a troll. How... entertaining. (2.00 / 3) (#33)
by fyngyrz on Wed May 28, 2008 at 05:34:11 PM EST

Spamming is not tolerated here. Any comment may be deleted by a site admin, and all spammers will be deleted. This is fair warning.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

post some more shit articles (1.50 / 2) (#35)
by ray eckson on Wed May 28, 2008 at 05:41:54 PM EST

so we can dump them


wampsy: hey ray why don't you start up a site. you could call it ray5.
rusty: I gotta fix that stupid cancel bug.
booger: How's that for daring to get ray eckson all sniffy, you cow?
poopy: Not that I'm gay or anything, but for you I might make an exception.
[ Parent ]
but no one can match (none / 0) (#48)
by yellow shark on Wed May 28, 2008 at 11:22:13 PM EST

your shit comments. lulz

[ Parent ]
we're gonna dump your shittttty stoooory (1.60 / 5) (#40)
by ray eckson on Wed May 28, 2008 at 07:31:52 PM EST

ha!

suck it!


wampsy: hey ray why don't you start up a site. you could call it ray5.
rusty: I gotta fix that stupid cancel bug.
booger: How's that for daring to get ray eckson all sniffy, you cow?
poopy: Not that I'm gay or anything, but for you I might make an exception.

You just don't have enough friends, Ray. n/t (none / 0) (#82)
by fyngyrz on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:41:47 PM EST


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

section = shit story elephant graveyard (none / 0) (#87)
by ray eckson on Thu May 29, 2008 at 11:34:30 PM EST




wampsy: hey ray why don't you start up a site. you could call it ray5.
rusty: I gotta fix that stupid cancel bug.
booger: How's that for daring to get ray eckson all sniffy, you cow?
poopy: Not that I'm gay or anything, but for you I might make an exception.
[ Parent ]
2pm finish? Help 'round the house? (2.00 / 2) (#44)
by eavier on Wed May 28, 2008 at 09:50:09 PM EST

WHY DON'T WE MARCH THEM OFF TO A FACTORY INSTEAD? GET THEM TO MAKE SOME SNEAKERS TIL SCHOOL STARTS AGAIN.

Whatever you do, don't take it into your house. It's probably full of Greeks. - Vampire Zombie Abu Musab al Zarqawi

Ufology Doktor in da house

some of the points (3.00 / 3) (#45)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Wed May 28, 2008 at 10:22:03 PM EST

i disagree on are:
  1. the arts. music and art are essentials not extras.
  2. foreign languages should be included.
  3. teacher pay. all teachers should be paid well so as to attract high quality candidates to the profession.  
  4. p.e. or at least physical exercise of some sort during the day.
  5. children under the age of 12 so at least NEED recess.
  6. wonder what you would do with the child who excels in mathematics while being unable to read? (for example)- would they move on or would they stay back?
  7. i suggest we allow children (and teachers) bathroom breaks.  
  8. whether you like it or not- ending at 2 would leave a lot of children without decent supervision for a large portion of the day.  
  9. paying children to come to school and/or for doing well.  i can think of all kinds of reasons why this would not be a good idea.


By the numbers (none / 0) (#77)
by fyngyrz on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:26:07 PM EST

1 - we disagree. History yes, training as players, no.

2 - To the extent they're relevant, put them in reading and writing. Most foreign language programs in the US have an *extremely* limited set of languages offered. I don't think arbitrarily adding to the French and Spanish speaking populations has all that much merit, frankly. Greek and Latin, those I could see as relevant, not to mention mind-expanding.

3 - I don't object to high pay, per se, just to it alone (and I *do* object to tenure.) The fact is, there are some very good teachers who teach for low pay today. And some who suck. I don't think high pay alone would change the balance, though I do indeed think that good teachers are worth a lot. As far as high pay alone goes, we can point at any number of examples where high pay has not ensured high performance. With that in mind, I don't see why you might think education would be much different.

4 - they'd be home at 2. They have many hours left to run around in if they're so inclined. They're not cattle; we're not preparing them for sale by muscle mass.

5 - I don't think that's actually been established, as opposed to classes that they enjoy.

6 - we agree :-) Try OL and /OL tags with LI /LI elements next time

7 - They'd move on in math. I cannot imagine any objection to someone racing through any part of this. If they get ahead, in an imbalanced manner as you suggest, the extra time available should probably be applied to the classes they're behind in.

8 - Yes, and?

9 - I think that is a force for positive change. See my comments to the post just above.

10 - Without specifics, what can I say? Perhaps you would be so good as to suggest some of those reasons?


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

i'm tired right now- (none / 0) (#85)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:42:10 PM EST

i'll answer you back tomorrow or the next day.  

i've been laughing all day about the lack of 6. was waiting for someone to notice.

[ Parent ]

going over the numbers. (none / 0) (#116)
by nononoitaintmebabe on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:48:18 AM EST

1 - we disagree. History yes, training as players, no.

I agree that art and music history are important subjects, but i would argue that giving students practical skills in music and art both enhances their thinking abilities (there's a lot of research on this right now) and also helps them learn the art/music history.  

2 - To the extent they're relevant, put them in reading and writing. Most foreign language programs in the US have an extremely limited set of languages offered. I don't think arbitrarily adding to the French and Spanish speaking populations has all that much merit, frankly. Greek and Latin, those I could see as relevant, not to mention mind-expanding.

I think latin and greek would be great offerings, but I disagree that your more "traditional" foreign languages shouldn't be offered.  we are living in a much more global world these days.  

3 - I don't object to high pay, per se, just to it alone (and I do object to tenure.) The fact is, there are some very good teachers who teach for low pay today. And some who suck. I don't think high pay alone would change the balance, though I do indeed think that good teachers are worth a lot. As far as high pay alone goes, we can point at any number of examples where high pay has not ensured high performance. With that in mind, I don't see why you might think education would be much different.

I think that we would have to do a better job of selecting teacher candidates, but I still believe that if we want to attract higher quality teachers we have to make the field lucrative.  

4 - they'd be home at 2. They have many hours left to run around in if they're so inclined. They're not cattle; we're not preparing them for sale by muscle mass.

? I was talking about that they would be unsupervised?  I'm not sure what you are talking about.  

5 - I don't think that's actually been established, as opposed to classes that they enjoy.

? i forget what this was about.  i'll answer it later.  

6 - we agree :-) Try OL and /OL tags with LI /LI elements next time

oops.  forgot the six.  

7 - They'd move on in math. I cannot imagine any objection to someone racing through any part of this. If they get ahead, in an imbalanced manner as you suggest, the extra time available should probably be applied to the classes they're behind in.

ok.  i just wondered.  

8 - Yes, and?
i was teasing you.  but i'm also trying to make the point that children in reality have physical needs such as using the restroom.  and they don't all do it on cue.  

9 - I think that is a force for positive change. See my comments to the post just above.

not sure what you are tlaking about here. i'll have to go back and look.  

10 - Without specifics, what can I say? Perhaps you would be so good as to suggest some of those reasons?
well first, where would this money come from? next, you ever hear parents argue over grades? can you imagine the kind of squabbling there would be if they were fighting over money?  and what of the families who would take the money from the kid and use for things other than the benefit of their child.  you do realize there are a lot of people who simply do not have their children's best interests at heart.  i've know parents who have stolen their child's ritalin.  oh let's see, what else-  you are teaching children that they require money for doing something they should be doing in the first place.  what's next, we pay them to brush their teeth?  
ok, i'm tired again.  i'll go back and pick up points 5 and 9 later.  

[ Parent ]

So let me get this straight. (none / 0) (#130)
by EMOTIVE GUY on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 02:56:42 AM EST

You don't believe having our children learn the languages that millions of other people around the world learn, but you believe they should learn a dead language like Latin and rationalize it by saying it's "mind-expanding"? I thought you were all against arts and art practitioning and yet here you are going all artsy fartsy about fucking Latin of all things.

It's not some mystical bullshit. It's a fucking language. Learning French or Spanish or Mandarin is just as "mind expanding" (arguably even moreso with Mandarin) and a damned sight more practical. What is this, some sort of whacked out troll? I don't honestly believe you to be as retarded as your contradictions and the initial article make you seem.
_______________________________________________
They told me to go easy on cock for a few days, but I didn't listen
- MotorMachineMercenary

[ Parent ]

-1; saying we need to pour money into a program (none / 1) (#54)
by AlwaysAnonyminated on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:18:19 AM EST

does not an article make.
---------------------------------------------
Posted from my Droid 2.
Knee-jerking at anything that might cost money... (none / 0) (#103)
by fyngyrz on Fri May 30, 2008 at 06:09:29 PM EST

Does not a rational objection make.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

Let me guess: you don't have kids.[] (none / 1) (#55)
by mirleid on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:53:25 AM EST



Chickens don't give milk
I have 3 Boys, all adults now. n/t. (none / 0) (#79)
by fyngyrz on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:27:01 PM EST


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

If that's the case... (none / 0) (#88)
by mirleid on Fri May 30, 2008 at 05:51:55 AM EST

...then how come you seem to ignore some basic facts about kid's behaviour, and the fact that they are intensely social creatures, extremely susceptible to peer pressure?

Chickens don't give milk
[ Parent ]
Because I also know... (1.50 / 2) (#100)
by fyngyrz on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:44:59 PM EST

...that when the touchy-feelie nonsense of "must not smack the little darlings" has swung away like the pathological over-reach of the pendulum it is, that they also are extremely susceptible to discipline -- as long as one stays focused on them. Which is the job of a school; it isn't to pontificate and ignore; it is to create and sustain a learning environment.

How do I know this? Not only am I a parent, I'm a martial arts instructor and a private music teacher. I deal with kids all the time in groups of various sizes. You can't control normal kids if you ignore them or if you let the state take away your tools (a spanking!? Oh HORRORS! Da INHUMANITY!!) But you certainly can if you're engaged with them and you have their respect. So the job includes earning that respect and never letting them get out of hand, by which I mean everything from spitballs to goofing off to passing notes.

As for them being social, that's not only noted, that's a terrific thing for any teacher worth 2 cents. The trick is to keep them engaged and social with the teacher -- not with each other, unless that's the point (debate, readings, critiques, etc.), in which case you control it. You can't sit there like a blinking cabbage, the way the teachers I see in public schools do. It's a job, a task; you have to work at it. You also have to maintain a group size that is rational; 30 kids is not a rational size for one person to manage and teach. At 30, two people is ideal -- one to teach, one to manage. Cameras aren't a bad idea, either, in this specific situation (classrooms.) That puts most accountability into the "no question" zone.

We have everything we need to make classrooms bulletproof learning experiences for kids with normal learning abilities. Everything, that is, except the will to do it. That'll come, though, I think, but it is a matter of pendulum swinging. We just have to wait.

Here's why it'll swing back: The current output of public schools is rife with people who cannot read, write, do math, or speak the language with any degree of expertise. They know little to nothing about science, they have no idea about the constitution or how the country was designed to work (yes, I'm looking right at you, cts), and the first thing they do when the reins come off is blunder into credit card debt. Now, you may think that saving little Johnny from a spanking is worth all that, but I don't, and I can't see my way there.

Discipline is not a dirty word.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

You miss one of the major points of K-12 (3.00 / 5) (#57)
by boxed on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:59:43 AM EST

One of the main points of a basic education system is to keep the kids away from the parents in a controlled environment long enough for the parents to get some work done and at the same time being fairly sure that their kids don't get hurt. As long as you do this, and only this, you will have a fairly successfull education system (meaning people will pick up interests and knowledge on their own mostly).

Completely agree, it is daycare. However... (1.00 / 3) (#74)
by fyngyrz on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:08:41 PM EST

...I'd prefer to see kids home, or at least have the opportunity; I think it is better for them. I'd prefer to see mom or dad home too, although the economic spiral downwards -- the general imbalance between bills and earnings -- seems to be leaving little room for that. I suspect it would be easier to try to fix it now, than later, though.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

This might be a good thing to *try* (none / 0) (#60)
by rpresser on Thu May 29, 2008 at 12:16:29 PM EST

but I don't think it would be a good thing for EVERYONE to go through this program K-12.

If there were real alternatives even in public education -- math-centered schools, arts-centered schools, vocational-centered schools -- then the population would be much more diverse, and people would grow up being exposed to more kinds of people.
------------
"In terms of both hyperbolic overreaching and eventual wrongness, the Permanent [Republican] Majority has set a new, and truly difficult to beat, standard." --rusty

No doubt. (none / 0) (#76)
by fyngyrz on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:10:12 PM EST

It's not a good thing for everyone to go through what we have now, for that matter. Not sure an experience can be designed that is good for everyone.


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

More specialization? (none / 0) (#121)
by Metasquares on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:27:20 PM EST

Much of the work that needs to be done in society is becoming interdisciplinary. Studying subjects in isolation (or grouping said subjects into teams of experts) is not a good model for promoting interdisciplinarity, as it fails to capitalize on the insights that fusing ideas from many disciplines can bring.

I've been trying to address this problem on the university level, but it should also be addressed in K-12.

[ Parent ]

Jack of all trades, master of none. (none / 0) (#126)
by rpresser on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 09:44:25 AM EST

How many true generalists are generated by liberal arts colleges? And how many useless idiots like my nephew, who couldn't identify the name Somerset Maugham or the quote "Aye, there's the rub" without a computer?
------------
"In terms of both hyperbolic overreaching and eventual wrongness, the Permanent [Republican] Majority has set a new, and truly difficult to beat, standard." --rusty
[ Parent ]
you make some reasonable points but (none / 0) (#63)
by mrbastard on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:43:03 PM EST

you contradict yourself too often, and the few points you don't contradict are bullshit.

Alternatively, if this was designed to lure idiots with no comprehension skills into the +1 box, it's very well constructed and I salute you.

MOAR ENGLISH COMPREHENSION CLASSES FOR TEH K-5

er k-12

"ohmygod I have a boyfriend" - Wen Jian

So what are the contradictions? n/t (none / 0) (#75)
by fyngyrz on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:09:05 PM EST


Blog, Photos.
[ Parent ]

9th period is for sex with teacher (2.57 / 7) (#89)
by yuo on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:22:01 PM EST

As a teacher, I think we currently under-emphasize the important things that students learn from sex with teacher. Sex with teacher helps give young girls confidence and more life experience. Many girls have improper supervision in the afternoon and end up hanging out with the wrong crowd. Just one violent experience can destroy a girl's whole childhood. Activities like youth basketball leagues and sex with teacher provide an important alternative to this kind of destructive behavior.

Some people think that sex with teacher is not worth having in school, and I've heard that sex with teacher is actually banned in some backward thinking areas of the United States, but it just makes me wonder if those people even know what sex with teacher is all about.

That's why it is so important to have well informed parents. You don't know how many students' mothers have come in after school waving around an opinion piece from some biased newspaper, prattling on endlessly about the supposed dangers of sex with teacher. Despite what you may think, I never get irritated with them. After all, they're just concerned about the well-being of their children. After I demonstrate what sex with teacher is all about, these mothers become some of its biggest fans.

It's time for America to set aside its prejudice, look past the propaganda, and embrace sex with teacher as a healthy and emotionally satisfying activity for all of our young girls except the fat ones.

I wish I had thought of pants pants pants pants pants pants pants pants.

Agree and Disagree (none / 0) (#105)
by Cambria on Fri May 30, 2008 at 09:18:54 PM EST

I do believe the way that schools are set up now can leave the slower kids behind but I'm not sure if the way you propose to deal with it (aptitude tests) will help. And I believe that no homework is the best idea - kids these days get too much homework and don't spend enough time being kids.

I also think that high performing teachers should get a bonus - the problem with some teachers (and I'm mainly thinking of highschool teachers here) is that they simply stop caring about the kids and it becomes just a way to earn money. Teachers need to have a genuine interest in the students.

I agree with wamps on lots of things as well though, like kids definately need recess. Maybe 45 for lunch and 15 for recess...

The major problem with your design, as others have already mentioned, is that schools are designed so parents can work. If the kids are coming home at 2pm, firstly, how are they going to get home? Bus, walk or the parent has to pick them up? Secondly, say the child makes his own way home, then a parent will still has to come home early from work to drive the kid to all these extra-curricular activities...

I think another problem is having art and sport etc at school allows kids to know what interests them... how will they say 'mum I want to play basketball after school' when they haven't been exposed to any sport IN school? You definately need to teach basic motor skills in the early years.

Assumes crappy transportation situation (none / 1) (#109)
by vectro on Sat May 31, 2008 at 01:42:59 PM EST

While it's true that in some ghettoized parts of the world, a car is required to get anywhere, there are in fact more enlightened places. In this areas, one can get from point A to point B by walking, bicycling, or using public transit. This magical result is the consequence of thoughtful city planning, as opposed to sprawl.

“The problem with that definition is just that it's bullshit.” -- localroger
[ Parent ]
That's true (none / 0) (#112)
by Cambria on Sat May 31, 2008 at 07:46:43 PM EST

I was using my childhood as an example - I grew up in country Australia and there wasn't any busy around my town.

But even so, would you really want you're 6 year old child catching the bus/train by themselves?

[ Parent ]

*buses (none / 0) (#113)
by Cambria on Sat May 31, 2008 at 07:47:05 PM EST



[ Parent ]
Why the sudden Russian-style plural?. (none / 0) (#128)
by tetsuwan on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 03:04:32 PM EST


Njal's Saga: Just like Romeo & Juliet without the romance
[ Parent ]

The year is 2008. (none / 0) (#108)
by chocolatetrumpet on Sat May 31, 2008 at 06:34:10 AM EST

Do we really need to base our schooling model on the 1800s?

If some research on how people learn has been completed since then, perhaps we could use it!

The truth is in the ice cream.

Yea, unions are your problem. (none / 0) (#172)
by paxman on Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 06:46:41 PM EST

Have any suggestions for getting rid of them?

Varying types of people (none / 0) (#173)
by apteryx01 on Mon May 11, 2009 at 09:01:00 PM EST

Of course I would love for basic history, science, anthropology, and the ideas of Western (and other) Civilization to be common knowledge.  Sarah Palin would never get a vote among an educated public.

However, here is something to consider.  Most people are just not interested in the past or in ideas or indeed in anything that they can't apply practically in a way that they can foresee right now.  You can't make them interested, and forcing them to take classes won't make them learn.

Here is an alternative way to do K-12 education.  Give the kids considerable choice, and cater to these choices with quality.  So, for kids who are only interested in practical things, show them (hands-on, not with lecture courses) lots of practical things, like how to build stuff, how to repair stuff, how to negotiate a deal, how to manage money, etc.  For the kids who are interested in far-out things, give them serious, in-depth courses in science, math, history, ethical thought, etc.

Since they're all in an enclosed space, some of the knowledge in every course will rub off on people who didn't take it.  They will get an appreciation for what "the other side" contributes.  And, each kind of person will get a good education in what they genuinely like, as opposed to a mediocre education in a mixed-up version compromised for forcing all people through it.

If you want to explore this approach even further, check out Sudbury schools.

Reforming K-12 Education | 173 comments (162 topical, 11 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!