Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Can't we all just get along? What I wouldn't give for a competent, middle of the road President open to compromise on a wide range of issues who could bring the factions together.
Ah, I got it!
The Dalai Lama for President!
I mean both parties have great candiates, but their idea's can be of the extreme and not be beneficial. I was thinking why not have a Buddhist President.
I've seen posts here that progressives fear the far right, and that the right fears the left.
I think that what the far right and the far left fear is not each other. They both know that their agendas aren't going to win. But what they fear are the sensible ones.
The sensible ones are those who insist that you work hard to get ahead, but want you to have reasonable opportunities to do so. They want a meritocracy based on a reasonably level playing field. They want people to be able to continue their traditions, but to also be accepting towards those who have different traditions. They want people to live and let live, and have mutual respectful towards others who are both similar and different to them. This attitude transcends racial, ethnic, gender, religious, sexual orientation/gender identity, income, education level, and many other boundaries.
This is a huge threat to both the far left and the far right. So they distract us with things like fearmongering about immigrants and Muslims, microaggressions and continually insignificant ways that minority groups are oppressed. They don't want us to stop with the divisive nonsense; they want us to revel in it.
So beware the sensible ones!
The left absolutely does not want equality of opportunity or a meritocracy. If they did, they would support school vouchers and let talent/motivation rise to the top regardless of socioeconomic level, race, or ethnicity.
The left absolutely does not want equality of opportunity or a meritocracy. If they did, they would support school vouchers and let talent/motivation rise to the top regardless of socioeconomic level, race, or ethnicity.
This is why things are the way they are. Everyone is quick to blame the other party when in truth it's BOTH their faults.
This is why things are the way they are. Everyone is quick to blame the other party when in truth it's BOTH their faults.
How so? The left is adamantly opposed to letting talent/motivation rise to the top, which would be a meritocracy. They want to keep kids trapped in the schools that are dumbing them down.
It's exactly why we have the best university system in the world (competitive admissions - a meritocracy - even among public universities), but our K-12 school system is less than mediocre.
Quote:
"The most recent PISA results, from 2012, placed the U.S. an unimpressive 35th out of 64 countries in math and 27th in science.Among the 34 members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which sponsors the PISA initiative, the U.S. ranked 27th in math and 20th in science."
I mean both parties have great candiates, but their idea's can be of the extreme and not be beneficial. I was thinking why not have a Buddhist President.
both parties have great candidates? Really? I've seen better leadership at my local mayor level then the folks up for president.
How so? The left is adamantly opposed to letting talent/motivation rise to the top, which would be a meritocracy. They want to keep kids trapped in the schools that are dumbing them down.
It's exactly why we have the best university system in the world (competitive admissions - a meritocracy - even among public universities), but our K-12 school system is less than mediocre. U.S. students lag internationally | Pew Research Center
Really? the right wants a meritocracy? Bwahahahhahahaha.
Seriously, the only meritocracy the right wants, is "did your parents have enough money".
Large levels of inequality harm the ability of students at schools to be succesful. Nothing in your arguments has said "hey lets have a parent be at home to care for kids". That would make more of a difference then most anything else.
And we already know via The Millionaire Next Door that 80% of millionaires are first-generation wealthy. That is, their parents weren't rich.
Quote:
Seriously, the only meritocracy the right wants, is "did your parents have enough money".
No, that's the lefties who won't give kids vouchers. They guarantee that only those whose parents have money can afford to buy a better and more suitable K-12 education. The last thing the left wants is an actual meritocracy.
Can't we all just get along? What I wouldn't give for a competent, middle of the road President open to compromise on a wide range of issues who could bring the factions together.
Ah, I got it!
The Dalai Lama for President!
We can never get along as long as we're voting for people to enforce our opinions on others who may disagree with us. Politics is inherently divisive and fundamentally creates conflict in society.
How so? The left is adamantly opposed to letting talent/motivation rise to the top, which would be a meritocracy. They want to keep kids trapped in the schools that are dumbing them down.
It's exactly why we have the best university system in the world (competitive admissions - a meritocracy - even among public universities), but our K-12 school system is less than mediocre. U.S. students lag internationally | Pew Research Center
And Bush gave us, no child left behind... Your point? Pick any party it doesn't matter they both are out for themselves.
And we already know via The Millionaire Next Door that 80% of millionaires are first-generation wealthy. That is, their parents weren't rich.
No, that's the lefties who won't give kids vouchers. They guarantee that only those whose parents have money can afford to buy a better and more suitable K-12 education. The last thing the left wants is an actual meritocracy.
Oh please. A million doesn't even get you into the top 1%. You are demonstrating that you have NO idea what the levels of wealth inequality are.
And the whole "you cant get a voucher to go to school" is hilarious.
Lets say we voucherize schooling. Ok then...now as time goes along...we dont increase the vouchers, instead we just let inflation eat them away. You KNOW it would happen. 20 years from now there would be massive differences in education based upon income. Right now its private vs public, but your desire is for everything to be segmented out.
Sigh. I know how compelling the idea of capitalism being used for schooling is. I even agree with parts of it. But the end result that I see form it tends to be bad.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
