ABC turns programming over to Obama

[SK-1]

NEWS TO BE ANCHORED FROM INSIDE WHITE HOUSE. Just like Russia?:rolleyes: Nationalized Networking In Action!

No, I do not totally hate this idea. It's new and I am just throwing it out there for debate. I can just about guess who here will have "no problem " with this:p

On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care -- a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!

Highlights on the agenda:

ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.

The network plans a primetime special -- 'Prescription for America' -- originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate.

The Director of Communications at the White House Office of Health Reform is Linda Douglass, who worked as a reporter for ABC News from 1998-2006.

Late Monday night, Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay fired off a complaint to the head of ABCNEWS:

Dear Mr. Westin:

As the national debate on health care reform intensifies, I am deeply concerned and disappointed with ABC's astonishing decision to exclude opposing voices on this critical issue on June 24, 2009. Next Wednesday, ABC News will air a primetime health care reform “town hall” at the White House with President Barack Obama. In addition, according to an ABC News report, GOOD MORNING AMERICA, WORLD NEWS, NIGHTLINE and ABC’s web news “will all feature special programming on the president’s health care agenda.” This does not include the promotion, over the next 9 days, the president’s health care agenda will receive on ABC News programming.

Today, the Republican National Committee requested an opportunity to add our Party's views to those of the President's to ensure that all sides of the health care reform debate are presented. Our request was rejected. I believe that the President should have the ability to speak directly to the America people. However, I find it outrageous that ABC would prohibit our Party's opposing thoughts and ideas from this national debate, which affects millions of ABC viewers.

In the absence of opposition, I am concerned this event will become a glorified infomercial to promote the Democrat agenda. If that is the case, this primetime infomercial should be paid for out of the DNC coffers. President Obama does not hold a monopoly on health care reform ideas or on free airtime. The President has stated time and time again that he wants a bipartisan debate. Therefore, the Republican Party should be included in this primetime event, or the DNC should pay for your airtime.

Respectfully,
Ken McKay
Republican National Committee
Chief of Staff

MORE

ABCNEWS Senior Vice President Kerry Smith on Tuesday responded to the RNC complaint, saying it contained 'false premises':

"ABCNEWS prides itself on covering all sides of important issues and asking direct questions of all newsmakers -- of all political persuasions -- even when others have taken a more partisan approach and even in the face of criticism from extremes on both ends of the political spectrum. ABCNEWS is looking for the most thoughtful and diverse voices on this issue.

"ABCNEWS alone will select those who will be in the audience asking questions of the president. Like any programs we broadcast, ABC News will have complete editorial control. To suggest otherwise is quite unfair to both our journalists and our audience."

Original link.
http://www.drudgereport.com/flashaot.htm

[mlee49]

Yay Socialism FTW!

When will M$ take over the gov? I predict 2018, just after IE 12 turns your pc into a mind melting machine that causes you to look at msn.com 24/7 and take mindless surveys for Dell.

[Wile E]

Oh give me a fucking break!!! I hate primetime media, a debate without opposing viewpoints? How the hell is that a debate at all?

And will somebody kindly inform the president that his job is not to appear on television constantly, but to RUN THE FUCKING COUNTRY. Work on getting us OUT of debt instead of growing it further, and then appearing on yet ANOTHER talk show, you fucking douche.

I still couldn't care less about his teleprompter tho. lol.

[From_Nowhere]

In Russia, I mean the USA, TV watches you!

[SK-1]

Good. No one slamming me (yet) for an Obama related post:)
Your thoughts were pretty much on the spot with mine. Things are changing,fast.

[btarunr]

Tomorrow you'll have the government tell you a lot more things, it will become a greater part of your daily life. Very totalitarian.

*remembers Dr. Wallace Breen's speeches playing throughout Half Life 2*

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/b0/DrWallaceBreenHL2.jpg/125px-DrWallaceBreenHL2.jpg

[FordGT90Concept]

Sounds like another buy 83%-of-the-networks'-airtime-the-night-before-election move. FFS, try to ignore WTF Obama does for a day. This is getting very, VERY tiresome and he has only been in office what, 150 days? Is it time to impeech him yet because he's so full of himself? I'll go punch a wall now.

The line is blurring between Obama and the likes of Hussein, Kim Il Sung, Kim Jung Il, Chavez, Achmedinajad, and all the other dictators we love to hate (and some even killed). Yes, he is becoming a dictator trying to keep the populous saturated with his face. All that's missing is an executive order that abolishsthe Judicial and Legislative branches and invalidates the Constitution. Seriously, how could 60% of Americans not see this coming?

Am I the only one that hasn't seen him give a good speech? I mean from the heart. Not this robot, I-can-read-a-teleprompter type of speech.

Meh, I'll be watching NBC/CNN as usual. I get 0% of my news from any ABC affiliated source. I never have and never will.

[DaMulta]

If we can find money to kill people(400 billion + for the military)Then we should be able to find money to take care of everyone sick.

It's time America catches up with the world, and gives us all free medical heathcare! Don't push that BS it's not as great as we have it here. Look over to countries that have it with money like us. They live longer, live healthier lives, and all benefit from it.

Insurance companies along with hospitals do not want it due to MONEY! They make so much money it's not even funny......

Socialized Teachers and schools have worked. Can you imagine fitting the bill for your kids to go to school like college think how much that would cost.

Socialized Firemen, and departments. Imagine having to pay 3ed parties if your house cought on fire, your car was on fire with you in it....and so on.

Socialized Police Imagine having to pay for protection from thugs and such...

To say that Socialized Doctors with Socialized medicine engineering would not work would be saying that the USA Military is a big fat joke. That they couldn't get the job done right if they wanted to because the Military is Government ran......I'm sure that all the stuff that the Military invents and uses is all behind the times across the world technology wise.....

[FordGT90Concept]

The government has no money and won't have money for at least eight years. There's absolutely no reason to do this nor or do it ever when there's ways to fix healthcare without socializing it. See page 3 of the "Letterman is FUBAR" thread if you want to find out how to tame pricing for healthcare.


The only industries that need to be socialized are ones that fulfill tasks where money is spent and not earned (e.g. road construction) and at the same time, it must fulfill a roll that is vital to the country (infrastructure is critical to economic prosperity).

Police forces shouldn't be in it for the money, so they are socialized. Is it perfect? Hell no! There's abuse everywhere, unlawful tickets, and the like. Could it be privatized? Yes. Should it be privatized? Probably not although there wouldn't be many differences.

Fire departments are funded by the government because they fulfill a duty that is required by society and again, not profitable. It could also be privatized but if that were done, anyone that has a house fire would be bankrupted to pay for putting it out. Probably not a good idea. The advantage of keeping it socialized is that even if one house burns down, the entire town/city is at stake so there is an incentive to finish the job no matter how costly.

Socialized education has an epic fail stamped on its forehead. It is inefficient and ineffective by all measures.

Insurance companies are a bandage for an expensive product or service. Because you can't just go out and buy a new one if something bad happens, insurance companies take your money all the time and return some of the money should something go wrong. They only exist because people don't know how to save anymore.


There's only 12-13 countries that live longer than in the USA and it isn't by very long. Moreover, those countries tend to have better lifestyles than here in the USA (like Japan having mostly a rice and seafood diet). We live a long time despite how hard we try to kill ourselves (30%+ obese). If we changed over to healthy diet and exercise regime, I expect the median age of the USA to far exceed the rest because of all the advancements made, and applied, by the healthcare industry.

In the end, the "world" is mooching off USA's medical advancements which means craploads in financing to those that research.


Go to John Hopkins or Mayo Clinic and you'll find the best medical service in the world offering all of the latest cutting edge advancements and some that even being tried for the first time. Hell, one of my doctors at Mayo Clinic is currently running a research study for a condition I have to find a safer, more effective way to treat it. How many places in the world would do that?

[farlex]

Hell, one of my doctors at Mayo Clinic is currently running a research study for a condition I have to find a safer, more effective way to treat it. How many places in the world would do that?

Many, that is being done often. You think America is the only place medical breakthroughs are made?

And although I've already said this and although I know t'won't do any good, privatizing education or healthcare completely won't do any good, just a bit of harm. You'll see the same thing with education that happens now, the poor get bad educations, the rich get better educations (with variables in between to be sure). The only difference is instead of paying taxes you pay the school directly, and less people would go to school. Some of the poorer of the nation would decide school is a luxury they can't afford, and instead simply turn to other ways to make money (drug cartelling of course, but really selling anything). So what you have is a more expensive, less educated, more sales prone society (none of which our society needs). But yay, you don't have to pay as many taxes. :rolleyes:

[FordGT90Concept]

It's socialized education now, not privatized. Segments are privatized and they are doing well, it is the government-sponsored segment that is failing.

Government's job is to provide a safety net to make sure all kids get an education; however, the more that is privatized, the better it is for everyone. Government's only role is to handle those that fall out of the privatized systems. Right now, privatized schools are considered a privilege and not the norm; therein lies the problem.

[farlex]

It's socialized education now, not privatized. Segments are privatized and they are doing well, it is the government-sponsored segment that is failing.

I already explained why that is. If you privatize all of it you'll see the same sectors failing that are now (the poor ones). Only it won't matter b/c the only standard that will matter is the money the school can make. So in a way sure perhaps they won't fail as much (if you don't measure it the same way that is).

I'm assuming you know that I know it's socialized right now, not sure why you felt you needed to point that out.

[FordGT90Concept]

I'm not saying privatize all of it. I'm saying aim for 90% that require no government involvement and assist the remaining 10% to cover the costs to get them an education. If the education system is so private-heavy, there's no reason for government owned/ran schools funded primarily by taxpayer money. Invest in the kids, not the institutions.

[DaMulta]

Did you go to public school? How many people do you think go to public schools?

Ford your system would cater for the rich and piss on the poor just like the old days. That's what healthcare in America is now, caters to the rich and pisses on the poor. You can't tell me it doesn't when a good heathcare insurance is going to cost around 300usd a month or more. On top of that if you have any kind of conditions you are going to be denied coverage meaning that you are going to be forced to pay thousands if not 100,000s of thousands of dollars if you need help. On person in my family thank god she makes a ton of money has to have a sergury every 3 months that cost her 30,000 dollars that she pays out of pocket because insurance will not cover her. She can afford it thanks to her job that she has, but how many people in America could afford something like that? If she lived in a place liked in the EU or many other places her surgery would be covered and she would not be forced to pay as much for a disease that many people have. I have seen her cry because of the fact she knows some kids have what she has and their parents simply can not pay for the surgeries.....

[Triprift]

It constantly amazes me that we here in Australia have medicare and the pharmecutical benifits scheme and yet in America there is seemingly bugger all unless you have the money to pay. We have private health insurance here but its optional and will still recieve quality heath care without it and without the cost.

[FordGT90Concept]

Did you go to public school? How many people do you think go to public schools?

Ford your system would cater for the rich and piss on the poor just like the old days. That's what healthcare in America is now, caters to the rich and pisses on the poor.
That's what standards are for. In the case of education, the private schools must be held to certain standardized testing standards. Should a lot of students fail those tests, there's a good chance that school will be closing (as it should) if they don't fix it. It caters to everone with an average wage and taxpayers will cover the poor (again, target is less than 10% of educations paid for by tax payers).


You can't tell me it doesn't when a good heathcare insurance is going to cost around 300usd a month or more. On top of that if you have any kind of conditions you are going to be denied coverage meaning that you are going to be forced to pay thousands if not 100,000s of thousands of dollars if you need help. On person in my family thank god she makes a ton of money has to have a sergury every 3 months that cost her 30,000 dollars that she pays out of pocket because insurance will not cover her. She can afford it thanks to her job that she has, but how many people in America could afford something like that? If she lived in a place liked in the EU or many other places her surgery would be covered and she would not be forced to pay as much for a disease that many people have. I have seen her cry because of the fact she knows some kids have what she has and their parents simply can not pay for the surgeries.....
The $100,000 bills lead to the $300/month insurance cost. If you told that patient up front that performing this proceedure would cost you in excess of $100,000, do you really think they'll do it? Hell no unless they are a multimillionaire.

That person in your family knows the price tag and has no problem spending it. Good for her.

The way I look at it, if you can't afford to fix it (except something that could turn into a pandemic) why should you? Instead of letting nature run its course, people spend millions of dollars thinking they'll be able to live another year. This habit is bankrupting the system because that 50 year old grandma wanted breast implants six months before cancer took her. Instead of the patient paying the bills for both those implants and her cancer care, the hospital has to eat it and pass it on to all the other customers. This is in effect why the cost of care is skyrocketing. People are "spending" money they don't have.


If you're a billionaire and can afford those expensive surgeries to add a few years to your life, by all means do it. That means more money for the healthcare system so they can improve things. If you can't afford it, why should you do it and pass the cost on to society? It is pure selfishness. Society doesn't love you that much.


It constantly amazes me that we here in Australia have medicare and the pharmecutical benifits scheme and yet in America there is seemingly bugger all unless you have the money to pay. We have private health insurance here but its optional and will still recieve quality heath care without it and without the cost.
Can they turn customers away?

[T3hPwn3r3r]

The $100,000 bills lead to the $300/month insurance cost. If you told that patient up front that performing this proceedure would cost you in excess of $100,000, do you really think they'll do it? Hell no unless they are a multimillionaire.


Exactly why I support universal health care.

Then again, there is no getting through to people like you until you're 27, unmarried, with cancer.

Then you'd be all up in arms for it.

When my grandfather had lung, brain, skin, among other kinds of cancers that had spread all over his body, and a round of successful surgeries to put him into remission after being coupled with chemo, he has hit with a medical bill of the likes you'd never have imagined.

This is in southeastern Kentucky, where the average family earns ~$12k/yr.

Some parts of the country have higher wages and higher average costs for things, yet there are some places that you can buy a new, 4000 sq. ft. house for 5000$, and that's a lot of money to people.

Are you saying people who don't get high wages in urban areas are less important and their health is less valuable?

Good to know you don't care about those who grow your corn, mine your coal, and cook your meals.

That's what standards are for. In the case of education, the private schools must be held to certain standardized testing standards. Should a lot of students fail those tests, there's a good chance that school will be closing (as it should) if they don't fix it. It caters to everone with an average wage and taxpayers will cover the poor (again, target is less than 10% of educations paid for by tax payers).

In Mississippi, a statistically significantly larger amount of students pass the statewide standard examinations than in Massachusetts, however, look at who pumps out more Ivy Leaguers, or even students bound for college.

Standardized testing does not work, and for you to think it does makes me think you haven't been in an American classroom in the past 10 years.

"LEARN WHAT IS ON THE TEST, MEMORIZE IT, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHY IT IS IMPORTANT, BUT THIS IS ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW. NOW I DON'T CARE ABOUT MY JOB BECAUSE I CAN'T EVEN TEACH YOU HOW I WANT TO OR GO IN DEPTH INTO CERTAIN IMPORTANT THINGS."

^American public school mantra.

...and don't say private schooling.

I grew up in a town where the nearest private school was 2 hours away and cost 2x the average yearly income to attend for 4 years.



You look at healthcare and education like it's a business.

It's not business - it's life.

[FordGT90Concept]

Exactly why I support universal health care.
Do you really want to pay for every one's medical bill? It's already very well known that doing so will bankrupt the country more so than it already is and have very, very little to show for it. Hell, most hospitals are bankrupted by the mentally ill (who spend close to/over 2/3 a year in a hospital bed) and homeless, not the paying customer.

I do sound heartless but it needs to be done: if you can't afford the bill you shouldn't be allowed to proceed with the operation. The only exception to that rule is children where investing $100,000 in them today still means they could contribute millions back to society throughout their life time.

I would argue that the reason healthcare costs are getting so bad is because people with diseases that would have killed a man one hundred years ago (like cancer) no longer is. It costs hundreds of thousands of dollars they can't afford. Why should they get it? What makes their life more valuable, than say, the thousands of veterans that lost a limb in Iraq? Even then, cancer victims still outspend veterans 10:1 or more because they are often elderly and not as capable of fighting the disease like a 20-30 year old.


Then again, there is no getting through to people like you until you're 27, unmarried, with cancer.
If I didn't have the money, I wouldn't fight it. I wouldn't want to burden my family that would foot the bill.



This is in southeastern Kentucky, where the average family earns ~$12k/yr.

Some parts of the country have higher wages and higher average costs for things, yet there are some places that you can buy a new, 4000 sq. ft. house for 5000$, and that's a lot of money to people.
Capitalism means that your average hospital visit would be much cheaper in that region than say, New York City where people expect to pay more. Hell, if it turns out now medical facility can be maintained in that area without running in the black, they may have to operate on outside donations and/or some government program may have to be established which helps them acquire equipment, supplies, and other critical items that the locale simply can't support.


Are you saying people who don't get high wages in urban areas are less important and their health is less valuable?
People's health is valued by how much they are willing to spend.


Good to know you don't care about those who grow your corn, mine your coal, and cook your meals.
I am surrounded by corn/soybean fields and there's a hog confinement about 300 feet away. People with high risk jobs have better employee-based insurance as part of their compensation.



In Mississippi, a statistically significantly larger amount of students pass the statewide standard examinations than in Massachusetts, however, look at who pumps out more Ivy Leaguers, or even students bound for college.

Standardized testing does not work, and for you to think it does makes me think you haven't been in an American classroom in the past 10 years.

"LEARN WHAT IS ON THE TEST, MEMORIZE IT, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHY IT IS IMPORTANT, BUT THIS IS ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW. NOW I DON'T CARE ABOUT MY JOB BECAUSE I CAN'T EVEN TEACH YOU HOW I WANT TO OR GO IN DEPTH INTO CERTAIN IMPORTANT THINGS."

^American public school mantra.

...and don't say private schooling.

I grew up in a town where the nearest private school was 2 hours away and cost 2x the average yearly income to attend for 4 years.



You look at healthcare and education like it's a business.

It's not business - it's life.
Standardized testing means making sure students understand the basics of what is necessary to be a productive member of society: English, Mathematics, and some science. It is something schools shouldn't train for because if they did their part, all students will pass with ease. Standardized testing and other benchmarks are the only aspect of the education system that should be government controlled. If a high percentage of students fail the test, you're basically going to get a government agent (think FDA regulator for food industry) to oversee the school and determine what to do. If it is clear that something happened that caused the school to struggle (like many people moved to the area in a short period of time due to natural disaster) the agent may recommend grant money being forwarded to the school either to bus the students to another school that isn't overcrowded or to pay for more temporary teachers. If it is clear to the agent that the school is simply mismanaged and there is no evidence is being fixed, they will order it be closed.


These standardized tests should be administered at least once a month (if an agent is present) or once a year. In effect, it is the safety net which establishes when and where the government must get involved to keep the quality of education high. For the school, it would be akin to chapter 13 bankruptcy.


If private schools were competing amongst themselves like colleges and not with the public system. There would be a private school in almost every town (if not more than one) and the price should be pretty close to where it is now.



Edit: Let me lay it out real simple. You, and most Democrats, feel that you are entitled to health serives regardless of you can afford it or not. I, and most Republicans, feel that you are not entitled to health services. There's a fundamental disagreement there.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

Again, I hope you know what it's like to have an illness at a young age that requires a surgery that will put you into debt for the rest of your life in order to prevent your own death.

Enjoy being homeless after you home, car, etc. is repossessed.

Perhaps when your kids are on the street, or without a father, your only two options - you'll know what it's like and maybe be a little more understanding.

Yes, it's not pulling your own weight, financially, but subtract insurance costs and tack on a lesser or equal amount for taxes (unless you gross a VERY high income, in which case you need to quit being a selfish prick anyway and help out those who need it) and you're still paying the same.

I'm not a democrat, nor am I poor.

Again - standardized testing doesn't work. Plain and simple. Talk all you want, but until you've gone to an American public school, you know JACK.


"I am surrounded by corn/soybean fields and there's a hog confinement about 300 feet away. People with high risk jobs have better employee-based insurance as part of their compensation."
Until you get into the impoverished, poor areas of America.

You haven't seen a thing, and you obviously know nothing.

...and again, perhaps if you DO get cancer at age 27 and stick to your guns and say "I won't fight it", we'll be rid of one less selfish ass who is dragging this country to fall behind the rest of the world.

Why is it that we are the only developed country with unsocialized healthcare/education, and are quickly falling down the ranks in both?

[erocker]

Not watching. Canada looks better and better every day.

[Deusxmachina]

Some parts of the country have higher wages and higher average costs for things, yet there are some places that you can buy a new, 4000 sq. ft. house for 5000$, and that's a lot of money to people.

Can you give a link to some of those houses for sale? I've seen cheap houses, I've seen new houses, and I've seen big houses, but usually you don't get two out of those three, much less all three.

[FordGT90Concept]

Again, I hope you know what it's like to have an illness at a young age that requires a surgery that will put you into debt for the rest of your life in order to prevent your own death.
Everyone's already in debt. There is $36,666.67 of public debt for every man, woman, and child.


Yes, it's not pulling your own weight, financially, but subtract insurance costs and tack on a lesser or equal amount for taxes (unless you gross a VERY high income, in which case you need to quit being a selfish prick anyway and help out those who need it) and you're still paying the same.
You'll be paying a lot more because government is horrible with money; moreover, every community with a medical facility will have their local economy damaged by the reduced wages of medical staff. No one wins in socialized systems. Everyone gets mediocrity and the option to spend $100,000 to get a non-standard treatment isn't available.


I'm not a democrat, nor am I poor.
On this issue, you are.


Again - standardized testing doesn't work. Plain and simple. Talk all you want, but until you've gone to an American public school, you know JACK.
I did attend an "American public school." I learned more outside of school than in. That's how broken it is.


Until you get into the impoverished, poor areas of America.
They're impoverished because a) they don't have an education, b) they don't have a job, or c) they're too drugged up to work.


You haven't seen a thing, and you obviously know nothing.
Nice flame. This discussion ends here.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

"Everyone's already in debt. There is $36,666.67 of public debt for every man, woman, and child."
I'm not in debt.



"You'll be paying a lot more because government is horrible with money; moreover, every community with a medical facility will have their local economy damaged by the reduced wages of medical staff. No one wins in socialized systems. Everyone gets mediocrity and the option to spend $100,000 to get a non-standard treatment isn't available."
Ok, Ronald Reagan, again, go to a country with a well executed socialized healthcare system and tell me this again.


"On this issue, you are."
No, I'm just reasonable.


"I did attend an "American public school." I learned more outside of school than in. That's how broken it is."
Obviously you didn't learn much inside or out.


"They're impoverished because a) they don't have an education, b) they don't have a job, or c) they're too drugged up to work."
Wrong.


"Nice flame. This discussion ends here."
Again, hoping for your early cancer.

[btarunr]

I think you guys should cut it out. Don't reply to each others posts in this thread anymore.

[RevengE]

I think you guys should cut it out. Don't reply to each others posts in this thread anymore.

I second that.

[SK-1]

Again, hoping for your early cancer.

Spoken like a true outstanding TPU member.

[Mussels]

everyone play nice. i'm too tired to do anything atm, but if this continues when i wake up i'll be cracking out the banstick.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

Spoken like a true outstanding TPU member.

Simply wanting him to know what it's like. There are many people in this world who simply ignore the OTHER America - you know, the large regions where up to 50%+ can live in poverty.

My apologies to the mods, but this is something that strikes home to me. I simply dream of the day that all, no matter how wealthy or poor, have a universal right to life and health. I've seen some seriously fucked up kids who couldn't get the surgery, medicine, dental, or anything of the sort they need who have either died or become permanently disfigured, ill, toothless or some other sort.

[erocker]

Simply wanting him to know what it's like. There are many people in this world who simply ignore the OTHER America - you know, the large regions where up to 50%+ can live in poverty.

My apologies to the mods, but this is something that strikes home to me. I simply dream of the day that all, no matter how wealthy or poor, have a universal right to life and health. I've seen some seriously fucked up kids who couldn't get the surgery, medicine, dental, or anything of the sort they need who have either died or become permanently disfigured, ill, toothless or some other sort.

The greed of pharmecutical corporations (our real government) will never let that happen, though I completely understand your views on the subject.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

Yeah, I'm sorry if I got out of hand, but it's a very emotional subject for me... and what better place to rant than an internet forum :P

But really, my apologies, and Ford, I don't really hope you get cancer, but I do wish you'd try and be more understanding of those less fortunate.

[FordGT90Concept]

You have no grasp of my situation either. I have no problem sacrificing my health to keep the country strong. We can't afford universal healthcare and that alone, in my eyes, is reason enough not to do it.

[Deusxmachina]

Hey, hey, hey, no one gets banned until T3hPwn3r3r says where to buy a new, 4000 sq. ft. house for $5000. Having that information might be in everyone's best interest.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

Southeastern KY around the Pike/Bell/Harlan areas. You won't have cell phone service or clean water, you'll have to filter it yourself, but it can be done.

Look at auctions, especially. Any house in a "holler" will be had for CHEAP these days.

I shit you not, my aunt just got one.

However, if you have kids, do not send them to the schools there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lowest-income_counties_in_the_United_States

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/ba/Lowpcimap.png

The population of my home county:
1820 1,961
—
1830 2,929 49.4%
1840 3,015 2.9%
1850 4,268 41.6%
1860 5,494 28.7%
1870 4,415 −19.6%
1880 5,278 19.5%
1890 6,197 17.4%
1900 9,838 58.8%
1910 10,566 7.4%
1920 31,546 198.6%
1930 64,557 104.6%
1940 75,275 16.6%
1950 71,751 −4.7%
1960 51,107 −28.8%
1970 37,370 −26.9%
1980 41,889 12.1%
1990 36,574 −12.7%
2000 33,202 −9.2%

There's a reason the entire county abandoned after the coal boom. Those left are living in a world of shit.

40 percent live under the poverty line, and though the natives of the area put up a fuss, the recent 20/20 documentary on Appalachia covers the region well, displaying the severe problems in the drug trade.

About half of the houses are in decent shape, the rest look like:
http://prodygal.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/kentucky-poverty.jpg
http://www.change.org/photos/wordpress_copies/davis-bottom.jpg

[T3hPwn3r3r]

You have no grasp of my situation either. I have no problem sacrificing my health to keep the country strong. We can't afford universal healthcare and that alone, in my eyes, is reason enough not to do it.

Is that not the same mentality as a suicide bomber? "Sacrifice my life for the Muslim world's proesperity!"

[DaMulta]

In my state the avage wage is 8 dollars an hour. I'm sure we are all able to pay the 300 dollars a month for heathcare for our families....

Also Ford you went to public schools and it seems your doing ok. Everyone in my family(lacking me but maybe one day)went to public schools and are all making 100k and more a year. Also public College would be like private schools if it was turned too. Just to think about that, there would be sooo many family's that would not be able to afford it. Classes are around 300 a pop, books are expensive as hell. If these family's were forced to continue to pay highhealth care along with private school at the cost that Public Colleges fees are already it would be laughable to think a majority would be able to afford it.

Again America has the worlds leading Military which is government ran. It's not private and has the best of the best vs the rest of the world. So if the government was making all the drugs along with the research here in America why wouldn't it be as good?

[DaMulta]

Hey, hey, hey, no one gets banned until T3hPwn3r3r says where to buy a new, 4000 sq. ft. house for $5000. Having that information might be in everyone's best interest.
Detroit has the majority of these. It's crazy to think about how much of the city is empty.

You can get houses for around 20k here that have plenty of space BUT do need a little love and care.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

In my state the avage wage is 8 dollars an hour. I'm sure we are all able to pay the 300 dollars a month for heathcare for our families....

Also Ford you went to public schools and it seems your doing ok. Everyone in my family(lacking me but maybe one day)went to public schools and are all making 100k and more a year. Also public College would be like private schools if it was turned too. Just to think about that, there would be sooo many family's that would not be able to afford it. Classes are around 300 a pop, books are expensive as hell. If these family's were forced to continue to pay highhealth care along with private school at the cost that Public Colleges fees are already it would be laughable to think a majority would be able to afford it.

Again America has the worlds leading Military which is government ran. It's not private and has the best of the best vs the rest of the world. So if the government was making all the drugs along with the research here in America why wouldn't it be as good?
Exactly my initial argument.

It's all about execution and accountability not only for our money we would contribute towards healthcare, but for the millions, billions, if not trillions that are wasted and never benefit the people at all every year.

[From_Nowhere]

@T3hPwn3r3r: You're from, or around, Harlan County? I couldn't agree more about how run down that place is. Harlan makes most of these Alaskan villages seem like damned paradises.

[FordGT90Concept]

Also Ford you went to public schools and it seems your doing ok.
I'm not. It is more me not fitting the glove that is public schools...let's just say I didn't finish my degree at a public school.


Again America has the worlds leading Military which is government ran.
...because it has 100 times the funding which goes to the best private defense contractors in the world (e.g. Lockheed, General Dynamics, Raytheon, General Electric, etc.).



The cost of living in the USA has gone up and wages haven't. Personally, I can't wait until oil is $300 a barrel. No more importing shit from Asia. That's what started this mess in the first place (cheap consumer goods from another country).

[T3hPwn3r3r]

@T3hPwn3r3r: You're from, or around, Harlan County? I couldn't agree more about how run down that place is. Harlan makes most of these Alaskan villages seem like damned paradises.

Yep, spent 13 years there, Evarts area.

There still is no broadband internet, cable TV, or cell phone service where I lived.

From_Nowhere can attest to what kind of shit I lived in.

You feel safer deep in Chicago's west side, not even kidding.

Next time I'm down I'll take pictures of the house my aunt bought for 5 grand, above ground pool and all!

[Papahyooie]

FordGT is just behind the curve here... and by behind I mean ahead. What I mean is, people need to stop worrying about advancing and live within the means that life provides, and FordGT understands that. Obsession with advancement is the problem.

"There still is no broadband internet, cable TV, or cell phone service where I lived."

Now Im not targeting you atall T3hPwn3r3r, but your quote is a good example of what I mean. You dont have broadband internet? Eegads what will you do? Thats way more devastating than a life-threatening illness! (end sarcasm) People need to understand that nothing is a right. Nature itself (whether natural laws of science, or God, however you choose to see it) determines what happens. Absense of broadband internet, as well as life-threatening diseases are facts of life. As such, neither healthcare, nor internet are rights. People die. We hate it when it happens, but it happens, and its going to keep happening.

Another law of nature is the market. If something is ineffective, it wont sell. I dont agree with standardized testing, but I do agree with the privatization of schools. If you pay out of your pocket for schooling, youre going to expect it to be of quality. The schools that arent of quality will not survive. Simple as that. The problem is, people pay taxes and never SEE thier money being spent on public schools, so they never think about it beyond "damn i wish our school system was better." If you physically handed over cash or wrote a check, you'd think longer and harder about it. And market laws will dictate that the schools will not charge more than you can afford (on the median, I understand there are some that will never be able to pay, which is why I find Ford's idea intriguing) They will not charge more than you can afford because they wouldnt make any money. Schools would be just like cars. If you can afford a ferrari, then by jove, drive one. If you can afford a honda, then drive one. If you cant afford anything then get your ass up and walk. Thats nature. Thats life.

(to clarify, yes I have been through loved ones with life threatening diseases, and yes I went to a public school.)

Which brings me to why I think all these arguments happen. Democrats, liberals, whatever you want to call people of persuasion opposite mine, are dreamers. They want the world to be perfect and everyone shares and nobody cries. Unfortunately, sorry Nickleback, but we'll never see the day when nobody dies. Republicans, conservatists, once again whatever you want to call us, and however you want to make fun of us, I dont care. We're just realists. We believe in survival of the fittest (save the darwin cracks) I wonder how many on the other side really understand thier own principles that intimately.

(I guess I should comment on the OP lol... The idea of media being controlled by government atall makes me want to move far far away. And thats coming from one hell of a patriot.)

[SK-1]

FordGT is just behind the curve here... and by behind I mean ahead. What I mean is, people need to stop worrying about advancing and live within the means that life provides, and FordGT understands that. Obsession with advancement is the problem.

"There still is no broadband internet, cable TV, or cell phone service where I lived."

Now Im not targeting you atall T3hPwn3r3r, but your quote is a good example of what I mean. You dont have broadband internet? Eegads what will you do? Thats way more devastating than a life-threatening illness! (end sarcasm) People need to understand that nothing is a right. Nature itself (whether natural laws of science, or God, however you choose to see it) determines what happens. Absense of broadband internet, as well as life-threatening diseases are facts of life. As such, neither healthcare, nor internet are rights. People die. We hate it when it happens, but it happens, and its going to keep happening.

Another law of nature is the market. If something is ineffective, it wont sell. I dont agree with standardized testing, but I do agree with the privatization of schools. If you pay out of your pocket for schooling, youre going to expect it to be of quality. The schools that arent of quality will not survive. Simple as that. The problem is, people pay taxes and never SEE thier money being spent on public schools, so they never think about it beyond "damn i wish our school system was better." If you physically handed over cash or wrote a check, you'd think longer and harder about it. And market laws will dictate that the schools will not charge more than you can afford (on the median, I understand there are some that will never be able to pay, which is why I find Ford's idea intriguing) They will not charge more than you can afford because they wouldnt make any money. Schools would be just like cars. If you can afford a ferrari, then by jove, drive one. If you can afford a honda, then drive one. If you cant afford anything then get your ass up and walk. Thats nature. Thats life.

(to clarify, yes I have been through loved ones with life threatening diseases, and yes I went to a public school.)

Which brings me to why I think all these arguments happen. Democrats, liberals, whatever you want to call people of persuasion opposite mine, are dreamers. They want the world to be perfect and everyone shares and nobody cries. Unfortunately, sorry Nickleback, but we'll never see the day when nobody dies. Republicans, conservatists, once again whatever you want to call us, and however you want to make fun of us, I dont care. We're just realists. We believe in survival of the fittest (save the darwin cracks) I wonder how many on the other side really understand thier own principles that intimately.

(I guess I should comment on the OP lol... The idea of media being controlled by government atall makes me want to move far far away. And thats coming from one hell of a patriot.)

Nicely done.:) Hopefully, your insightful, intelligent post won't insight any name calling. I look forward to reading your future posts.

[FordGT90Concept]

I didn't answer this before but I feel it is necessary:

I'm not in debt.
You are a citizen, right? You carry your share of the government debt. It may be distant right now but one day, and that day may be soon, it will come due. Think of what happens when someone doesn't pay their dues (bankruptcy, foreclosures)--with current spending trends, that's where the nation as a whole is heading.

[Papahyooie]

Thank you Sk-1 :) I hope it doesnt degrade to that either. I try to keep it clean.

And Ford your latest post is something I forgot to comment on too. Whether you like it or not, we're all in debt. As I said, obsession with advancement is the problem, and that goes hand in hand with obsession with spending. We spend huge sums on things we dont need to keep up with society, and to live another day. Socialism isnt about sharing... its about greed. Those without money want those who do to share it with them. Now if I was filthy rich, I sure as hell would contribute to charities, hospitals, and whatnot. But as of now, im not, but I dont ASK for handouts. If i had a terminal disease, and someone wanted to donate to me, Id sure as hell take it. When my girlfriend had cancer (multiple times) an organization helped her out tremendously. But that was because she had spent all of her free time during high school volunteering at (and eventually hired by) this organization. Guess where this organization gets most of its money? Generous mulit-millionaires. Capitalists. Mostly republicans, because democrats spend all thier money on saving seals. (couldnt help myself, sorry) Point being, like I said, socialism breeds greed (which goes hand in hand with laziness). Capitalizm focuses on the individual. Some individuals are hoarders and thats thier right. Some individuals are generous, and thats thier right as well. The generous ones usually end up better off, because they form benificial relationships and get more rich. So though capitalism breeds greed, it also breeds generosity. When you get paid the exact same as everyone else, and pay the exact same as everyone else for everything, are you likely to help others?

[FordGT90Concept]

Socialism isnt about sharing... its about greed. Those without money want those who do to share it with them.
I never looked at it that way, interesting. Capitalism has the largest display of greed at the top (they hold the most value and want more); however, there is greed throughout the system but just not on display so much. Socialism has the largest display of greed at the bottom (they hold the least value and want more). Because of the vote, is it not inevitable that all democracys will eventually become socialist? The numbers at the bottom will always far exceed those at the top...

Hmm, another dynamic...

[farlex]

Which brings me to why I think all these arguments happen. Democrats, liberals, whatever you want to call people of persuasion opposite mine, are dreamers. They want the world to be perfect and everyone shares and nobody cries. Unfortunately, sorry Nickleback, but we'll never see the day when nobody dies. Republicans, conservatists, once again whatever you want to call us, and however you want to make fun of us, I dont care. We're just realists. We believe in survival of the fittest (save the darwin cracks) I wonder how many on the other side really understand thier own principles that intimately.


So I'm ascertaining (perhaps erroneously so) that you are of the notion that the realist way of thinking (in your mind conservative) is more advantageous. My father was always fond of saying "that's the reality of it". While there is certainly it's necessity, I resent the notion that those of the opposite persuasion are somewhat devoid of this realistic perspective, somehow unable to see things as they really are. In my mind reality is easy, it doesn't take much to look around and say this is how things are. The real fun, and conquest of humanity and the goal of progress, is to dream, is to change that reality to our liking, to say this is how things can be and this is how we can do it. I'm a dreamer, I'll admit it. I don't think, however, that this desire to see improvement at any time hinders my ability to notice things the way they currently are, in fact it perhaps heightens that sense. I think you must be a realist and a dreamer if you truly want anything different. Although if your content with either side completely I suppose there is something to be said for that too.

You say dreaming and reality are different schools of thought, I say dreaming is just reality with a bit of the human touch of ambition and creativity.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

FordGT is just behind the curve here... and by behind I mean ahead. What I mean is, people need to stop worrying about advancing and live within the means that life provides, and FordGT understands that. Obsession with advancement is the problem.

"There still is no broadband internet, cable TV, or cell phone service where I lived."

Now Im not targeting you atall T3hPwn3r3r, but your quote is a good example of what I mean. You dont have broadband internet? Eegads what will you do? Thats way more devastating than a life-threatening illness! (end sarcasm) People need to understand that nothing is a right. Nature itself (whether natural laws of science, or God, however you choose to see it) determines what happens. Absense of broadband internet, as well as life-threatening diseases are facts of life. As such, neither healthcare, nor internet are rights. People die. We hate it when it happens, but it happens, and its going to keep happening.

Another law of nature is the market. If something is ineffective, it wont sell. I dont agree with standardized testing, but I do agree with the privatization of schools. If you pay out of your pocket for schooling, youre going to expect it to be of quality. The schools that arent of quality will not survive. Simple as that. The problem is, people pay taxes and never SEE thier money being spent on public schools, so they never think about it beyond "damn i wish our school system was better." If you physically handed over cash or wrote a check, you'd think longer and harder about it. And market laws will dictate that the schools will not charge more than you can afford (on the median, I understand there are some that will never be able to pay, which is why I find Ford's idea intriguing) They will not charge more than you can afford because they wouldnt make any money. Schools would be just like cars. If you can afford a ferrari, then by jove, drive one. If you can afford a honda, then drive one. If you cant afford anything then get your ass up and walk. Thats nature. Thats life.

(to clarify, yes I have been through loved ones with life threatening diseases, and yes I went to a public school.)

Which brings me to why I think all these arguments happen. Democrats, liberals, whatever you want to call people of persuasion opposite mine, are dreamers. They want the world to be perfect and everyone shares and nobody cries. Unfortunately, sorry Nickleback, but we'll never see the day when nobody dies. Republicans, conservatists, once again whatever you want to call us, and however you want to make fun of us, I dont care. We're just realists. We believe in survival of the fittest (save the darwin cracks) I wonder how many on the other side really understand thier own principles that intimately.

(I guess I should comment on the OP lol... The idea of media being controlled by government atall makes me want to move far far away. And thats coming from one hell of a patriot.)
While I agree on the whole survival of the fittest things, I think that some people have a basic human right to be educated and healthy, much like people have a right to practice the religion of their choice.

Perhaps if we made a college education more affordable or even free, we'd see that lack of engineers, doctors, nurses, and other in-demand fields be made up.

...and if the field gets flooded, we'll have socialized healthcare, more people seeing the doctor more often, more people earning higher incomes to pay more tax money back into the system.

It's really hard to pick a side, because I do believe in working for what you get.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

[QUOTE=FordGT90Concept;6192]I didn't answer this before but I feel it is necessary:


You are a citizen, right? You carry your share of the government debt. It may be distant right now but one day, and that day may be soon, it will come due. Think of what happens when someone doesn't pay their dues (bankruptcy, foreclosures)--with current spending trends, that's where the nation as a whole is heading.
I'm a legal permanent resident, not only that, but unemployed. I get untaxed income from scholarships and those, for the most part, provided with the allowance (also untaxed) given to me by the state as a commuting Uni student, leave me sort of out of that loop. I guess I'm not carrying the share, rather contributing to it.

But hey, survival of the fittest, right? ;) :D :rolleyes: :eek: :cool: :o :p :)

[FordGT90Concept]

You're not a citizen...


Health is circumstantial. Take me, for instance. I was healthy for maybe two years out of my whole life. If I didn't have a family that could support me, I probably wouldn't be in very good shape right now (most likely, homeless).

The Constitution makes no mention of "health," nor should it. The Supreme Courts see cases on both side of the spectrum from abortions prior to birth to taking people off life support that can no longer make decisions themselves. The courts are the only place "health" should be discussed and only on a case by case basis.

Education is the same. The reason why there is a state sponsored education system is to discover the next weapon of mass destruction before the enemy can. This is why there is such a heavy emphasis on science and mathematics. The system that is in place now was established back in World War II. It serves the same purpose then as it does now.

The Constitution only says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." That means what it says. Mind you, this is only laws. The FBI, DEA, and other agencies have taken cults down (which are a religion) but there's no laws on the books that say cults are illegal.


The careers in demand (http://education.yahoo.net/degrees/articles/featured_top_demand_careers.html) right now are Network Administration, Windows Administration, Desktop Support, Database Management, Graphic Designer, Desktop Publisher, Motion Graphic Specialist, Case Clerk, Junior Paralegal, Legal Receptionist, Office Clerk, and more broadly, the following skills: technical aptitude, multilingual, and continuing education (getting certifications after having a degree).

Note that none of the careers you listed are in demand...hence the problem. There's nothing more unproductive than a workforce of overqualified professionals. Employers hate it because they deserve more money which means they often turn them away. Employees hate it because they spent 2+ years in college and they end up working for barely more than minimum wage.

College is a 2+ year risk. It doesn't pay off for most (seeing as just over half never finish the degree they started). That's why people with a good family career ahead of them don't necessarily need any education at all. Take my brother, for instance. He went to college for two years (dropped out) and has worked many jobs from Radio Shack to farm hand. He worked for my uncle with his painting business and my other uncle which is in the construction business. He then worked self employed with a local construction business and now it has expanded into a rather large construction business in a matter of a few years. His education didn't help him much. Most of the trade he learned from my grandfather and uncles.

Less than 50% of the jobs out there require a skilled workforce--to give them more than they need to be successful is nothing short of wasteful. No one is better qualified to make that decision than the individual.

What's happening is apprenticeships are practically extinct because quality is no longer a concern--only mass production of a quality plan. Almost everyone out there could benefit from an apprenticeship far more than a college degree.


Yes, colleges are ultra expensive and students that need help aren't getting it because their parents make too much. Unlike health and K-12, I am uncertain why the costs are skyrocketing so I have no ideas how to fix it. Sure, more competition wouldn't hurt but I think there is more to it than that.


Regardless, being a permanent citizen, why do you care?

[Papahyooie]

@ Farlex, well said, absolutely. Dreamers are required to have what we have nowadays. Computers, cars, medicine, everything we take for granted was invented by someone who wished it could be so. But none of these things are rights, and you can live without them. The problem comes when people think they cant. Then, as GT said, they spend more than they have to get it. (this goes for everything from healthcare to TVs) Which destroys the balance that has to be inherent in an economy to work. Emphasis has to be on realism. All just my opinion of course.

@ T3hpwnerer (or however you spell your name lol... ) I simply disagree. Everyone has an inalienable right to life (for a time), beliefs, and freedom. Why? Because these are natural. (some may disagree with freedom, but you ALWAYS have a choice. Even a slave can revolt, even if it ends with his death.) Education... eh maybe. Self-education is a right because thought is a right. However government supported education is definitely not an inalienable right. And healthcare isnt a right, nor is health itself. Sickness is a natural fact of life, as is death. You cant avoid either and to try is to go against nature (not saying dont take medicine, etc, I just mean that eventually you have to accept it)

And I'd like to know what GT asked as well... what stake do you have in it? I mean I know you live here so your environment affects you, but really?? Untaxed income and allowance from the state? Which state?

[FordGT90Concept]

An immigrant wanting government handouts, oh no! :D


Seems...like...deja vu... *glares at Mexico*

[T3hPwn3r3r]

@ Farlex, well said, absolutely. Dreamers are required to have what we have nowadays. Computers, cars, medicine, everything we take for granted was invented by someone who wished it could be so. But none of these things are rights, and you can live without them. The problem comes when people think they cant. Then, as GT said, they spend more than they have to get it. (this goes for everything from healthcare to TVs) Which destroys the balance that has to be inherent in an economy to work. Emphasis has to be on realism. All just my opinion of course.

@ T3hpwnerer (or however you spell your name lol... ) I simply disagree. Everyone has an inalienable right to life (for a time), beliefs, and freedom. Why? Because these are natural. (some may disagree with freedom, but you ALWAYS have a choice. Even a slave can revolt, even if it ends with his death.) Education... eh maybe. Self-education is a right because thought is a right. However government supported education is definitely not an inalienable right. And healthcare isnt a right, nor is health itself. Sickness is a natural fact of life, as is death. You cant avoid either and to try is to go against nature (not saying dont take medicine, etc, I just mean that eventually you have to accept it)

And I'd like to know what GT asked as well... what stake do you have in it? I mean I know you live here so your environment affects you, but really?? Untaxed income and allowance from the state? Which state?

I live in KY, and it's something provided by a socialized program for orphans/dependents of 100% disabled American veterans etc. etc.

I think to deny healthcare as something given to everybody is simply cruel and wrong, and that all people have a right to be healthy - the more unhealthy people there are, the more people will take on such mass amounts of debt (it's unrealistic to think people will let themselves die rather than take on debt), and in the case of disease and viruses (proper plural?) will be a greater threat to the rest.

I dunno, I've always just seen a healthy country as a strong country, but I definitely see where you're coming from... However, if we want the people of America to be the smartest and most capable in the world - we require a top notch educational system, and that likely won't happen through means of privatization, as there is no regulation on the standard at which kids are being taught. To cut hours and make teachers jobs easier we could simply teach up to basic multiplication, yes?

But really, when it comes to something that effects everyone (a better educated chef prepares better food, a better educated engineer creates safer cars), we could definitely use a bit more regulation, in my own eyes at least. Let's stop aiming for a yearly (low) benchmark and just set a higher bar that teachers of subjects can meet reasonably, something that takes a strong focus off of the basics and places it universally.

On that note, I'd be more than happy if education was left unsocialized, but rather there was more learning per tax dollar and the standards be raised.

Again - show me tax dollar accountability, and I'll show you America in prosperity.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

What's happening is apprenticeships are practically extinct because quality is no longer a concern--only mass production of a quality plan. Almost everyone out there could benefit from an apprenticeship far more than a college degree.


Yes, colleges are ultra expensive and students that need help aren't getting it because their parents make too much. Unlike health and K-12, I am uncertain why the costs are skyrocketing so I have no ideas how to fix it. Sure, more competition wouldn't hurt but I think there is more to it than that.


Regardless, being a permanent citizen, why do you care?

Why I care? Because even though things are being a bit fucked at the moment, I love this country.

Costs are getting more expensive due to inflation, higher spending, among other things.

My school's orientation for freshmen gives away 5000 400-page bound and printed books detailing university policies, majors, etc.

The same information is online in PDF form.

Save the money for the people who spent countless hours working the layout and designing all the pretty pictures of it, save the production, ordering, and shipping costs of such, then cut the pay of the guy who hands them out, instead leave a tray with cards in the entrance of the main building - I've just saved enough to provide several students their first years tuition.

Man... I rule.


As for apprenticeships - I agree entirely. Luckily, a minimum of one internship and 9 (I think) published works is required for my degree, giving me a fair deal of experience and some background to show to potential future employers.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

An immigrant wanting government handouts, oh no! :D


Seems...like...deja vu... *glares at Mexico*

I'm not racist, at all, believe me - but I think a lot of the ones who want the handouts most are the white guys who are out of work and the other various minorities that scatter America (We're not that racist anymore, the gap in unemployment shouldn't be that great). People are always screaming "THEY TUK URR JAWBSSSS!!!!" because the immigrants who cross the border actually want to WORK - unlike some of my peers of similar age.



http://verifiable.com/charts/1361

Now, though it is lower than ever, there's still a 5% gap.

That IS statistically significant.

[FordGT90Concept]

Why I care? Because even though things are being a bit fucked at the moment, I love this country.

Costs are getting more expensive due to inflation, higher spending, among other things.

My school's orientation for freshmen gives away 5000 400-page bound and printed books detailing university policies, majors, etc.

The same information is online in PDF form.

Save the money for the people who spent countless hours working the layout and designing all the pretty pictures of it, save the production, ordering, and shipping costs of such, then cut the pay of the guy who hands them out, instead leave a tray with cards in the entrance of the main building - I've just saved enough to provide several students their first years tuition.

Man... I rule.
Too bad there isn't enough price competition to encourage them to save that money. A lot of schools do that though (high schools and colleges) so I doubt that would be one of the first things to go.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

Yeah, but it's such a waste, especially as any higher learning institution offers internet access and often requires a wireless notebook of sorts - to spend thousands on 5000 fancy bound books at the beginning of every semester.

[FordGT90Concept]

I think we should start with getting rid of high school and go straight into vocational schools at around the age of 14-16. For those that are going into a family trade, they can start learning it sooner. For those that are going on to a skilled trade, the vocational school might teach them all they need to know without continuing on to an expensive college. Most of what is important in the workforce is already taught in, or just before, middle school.

[DaMulta]

I love how everyone forgets that the national debt was total under control before the bush term with the rep party in congress.......
It takes time to fix all those screw up, it's not an over night thing. Also Dems do help the poor.

I have always found it odd tha Republic party is the so calla Christian party. Yet, they always forget do on to others as you would have others do a pone you. Plus the facts about giving your coat off your back if some that needed it asked.......it blows my mind. When it's the Republican party that acts so un-Christan like.

Famers in that time(bible time) were forced by law to feed the poor their grain in people could not find anything to eat. Which today would be the sames standards of today with food stamps kinda in my view point.

I just can't get it in my head why we would want people less fornicate to have less and die in the street no matter their choices in life not to give a helping hand. Some people use them, and then get a ahead. Why punish the whole if it takes longer for some people to get back on their feet than others?

We are still going to have private health care and like Obama said if it really is better like they say then they should have nothing to fear because people will chose them more than public heathcare.

[DaMulta]

I think we should start with getting rid of high school and go straight into vocational schools at around the age of 14-16. For those that are going into a family trade, they can start learning it sooner. For those that are going on to a skilled trade, the vocational school might teach them all they need to know without continuing on to an expensive college. Most of what is important in the workforce is already taught in, or just before, middle school.In my state in High School you can take half a day to go to vocational school for free to learn a trade. Maybe that's a state by state thing......

[FordGT90Concept]

It is. My school had "Work Experience" which allowed you to go to some place of employment for two hours either before school or after school. You could count those two hours as school credit.


The federal debt was under control at the end of Clinton's term and was inline to be under control at the end of Bush's term as well. Obviously, it didn't for two reasons: the $700 billion bailout and because of the financial collapse in the last quarter, taxes came up about $300 billion short.

National debt wasn't and hasn't been under control since, oh about 1860 (that 8 is correct :eek:). It was at about 5.6 trillion in 2000:
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm


I'm not going to argue parties. Just vote for whom most matches your beliefs. In the case of Christians, that's usually the Republicans. The same can be said for minority groups (Latinos, African Americans, and homosexuals) and their leaning towards the Democratic party. Those reputations make it harder to get new registered voters but, that's their problem, not mine. Some Republicans are very charitable.

The food stamp program is relatively young being founded in 1962 under John F. Kennedy.

"Less fornicate?" LMAOPLANES :D


The problem with what Obama wants is the government will undercut/undervalue the already established private businesses resulting in, due to pricing, killing off all private insurers in a matter of years. This "program" will become an 800 pound gorilla on the government's back (every level) and the only way to kill it is to dissolve the government as a whole (like medicaid/medicare/social security). Temporary social programs have a historical habit of becoming permanent.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

My school had the option to do vocational training, but I was college bound, so I didn't bother.

Votech is not the answer to everything, there are careers that demand greater.

[FordGT90Concept]

Name a career that couldn't benefit from two years of vocational training. Hell, if people did vocational training prior to college, there would probably be far less drop outs because they'll know if the career is for them or not; moreover, it is good for employers because they get cheap labor and good for the government because it doesn't cost anything. I think we could gain a lot by ending highschool at 10th grade and go into vocational experience after that (or straight to college if you already are absolutely certain you know what you want to do).

[T3hPwn3r3r]

Name a career that couldn't benefit from two years of vocational training. Hell, if people did vocational training prior to college, there would probably be far less drop outs because they'll know if the career is for them or not; moreover, it is good for employers because they get cheap labor and good for the government because it doesn't cost anything. I think we could gain a lot by ending highschool at 10th grade and go into vocational experience after that (or straight to college if you already are absolutely certain you know what you want to do).

We better start beefing up our educational system then.

With 4 years of algebra, calculus, and statistics, gettings Cs and Bs, I struggled to pass my intro math class at University.

However, I do think high school should be more "crammed", as you say.

But as for vocational training for majors such as business - I'm not sure what that means there, but vocational schools here teach mainly trades and the likes, little to do with management or marketing, more to do with A/C repair and culinary arts.

I like the German education system - there's options similar to that - they separate students according to ability/goals after a certain period.
In contrast, secondary education includes four types of schools based on a pupil's ability as determined by teacher recommendations: the Gymnasium includes the most gifted children and prepares students for university studies; the Realschule has a broader range of emphasis for intermediary students; the Hauptschule prepares pupils for vocational education, and the Gesamtschule, or comprehensive school, combines the three approaches. There are also Förderschulen. (schools for the mentally challenged and physically challenged). One in 21 students attends a Förderschule.

In order to enter higher education, students are required to take the Abitur examination; however, students possessing a diploma from a vocational school may also apply to enter. A special system of apprenticeship called Duale Ausbildung allows pupils in vocational training to learn in a company as well as in a state-run school.

The main benefit is it takes the best and brightest and gives them the advanced courses they can use, not to be mixed in and held back by the slower kids.


...and apparently it's more effective. U.S. didn't even make the ranks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Student_Assessment#Com parison_with_TIMSS_and_PIRLS

[FordGT90Concept]

With 4 years of algebra, calculus, and statistics, gettings Cs and Bs, I struggled to pass my intro math class at University.
How many people even benefit from one year of algebra in their lifetime? I think we're talking less than 10% of the workforce. Why pay to teach the other 90% everything they'll forget almost immediately (less than five years)?


Let me layout what I'm thinking in terms of grades...

Instead of K-12, you only have K-8. All students must demonstrate understanding of English, Mathematics (addition, multiplation, subtraction, divisoin, modulus, geometry, and basic algebra like ratios and precentages), history (local, state, federal, and world), and government (your civil duty to vote and why it matters). Most of these schools are public funded.

Instead of 9th grade, you'll split up into private schools which teach a trade (the vocational schools). Depending on how large the community is, the number and size of these smaller schools vary. Schools include machining and industry, business, science, public services, and atheletics. They may be broken down further into auto repair, manufacturing, secretary training, etc. These schools are private because they are working for a business per say. Transfering between schools is relatively easy so if you work for one of these trade schools and find out it isn't for you, you can transfer to another one. These trade schools last no more than two years. They are only mandatory if you are unemployed (this means people working in a family trade don't have to attend).

At what is currently 11th grade, students can either enter the workforce if the two years of training was sufficient in trade school or they can continue on to private colleges. For instance, someone looking to be a mechanic may go straight into the work force while someone who is looking to be doctor will have to go to get additional, upwards of 6-8 years of additional schooling at a college.

Effectively what those two years of trade school is is two years of community college-level of education. Most of the students could leave school with an associate degree level of education at little/no extra cost.


The main benefit is it takes the best and brightest and gives them the advanced courses they can use, not to be mixed in and held back by the slower kids.
Slower (and bad) kids that aren't working in the private vocational schools would be put into what is currently high schools. They receive a general education with little/no specialization.


It is more effective because after 8th grade, students are doing something that they like. They actually have something to be excited about and a reason to be enthiastic about getting an education. High schools are the duldrums. High schools teach them how to past tests to get into a college but it serves little in the way of producing a productive member of society.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

How many people even benefit from one year of algebra in their lifetime? I think we're talking less than 10% of the workforce. Why pay to teach the other 90% everything they'll forget almost immediately (less than five years)?


Let me layout what I'm thinking in terms of grades...

Instead of K-12, you only have K-8. All students must demonstrate understanding of English, Mathematics (addition, multiplation, subtraction, divisoin, modulus, geometry, and basic algebra like ratios and precentages), history (local, state, federal, and world), and government (your civil duty to vote and why it matters). Most of these schools are public funded.

Instead of 9th grade, you'll split up into private schools which teach a trade (the vocational schools). Depending on how large the community is, the number and size of these smaller schools vary. Schools include machining and industry, business, science, public services, and atheletics. They may be broken down further into auto repair, manufacturing, secretary training, etc. These schools are private because they are working for a business per say. Transfering between schools is relatively easy so if you work for one of these trade schools and find out it isn't for you, you can transfer to another one. These trade schools last no more than two years. They are only mandatory if you are unemployed (this means people working in a family trade don't have to attend).

At what is currently 11th grade, students can either enter the workforce if the two years of training was sufficient in trade school or they can continue on to private colleges. For instance, someone looking to be a mechanic may go straight into the work force while someone who is looking to be doctor will have to go to get additional, upwards of 6-8 years of additional schooling at a college.

Effectively what those two years of trade school is is two years of community college-level of education. Most of the students could leave school with an associate degree level of education at little/no extra cost.



Slower (and bad) kids that aren't working in the private vocational schools would be put into what is currently high schools. They receive a general education with little/no specialization.


It is more effective because after 8th grade, students are doing something that they like. They actually have something to be excited about and a reason to be enthiastic about getting an education. High schools are the duldrums. High schools teach them how to past tests to get into a college but it serves little in the way of producing a productive member of society.

All I wanna know is - with your trade school idea, what if they don't have your desired trade?

I'm getting a degree teaching Spanish/English as a second language and a second major in public relations. This leads me to also wonder about those who want to specialize in two unrelated fields such as myself.

No vocational school around here has that sort of thing.

Also, I use algebra every day, statistics as well.

[FordGT90Concept]

All I wanna know is - with your trade school idea, what if they don't have your desired trade?
Either pick the school that teaches closest to what you want, move to an area that has the right facilities (think college dormitories close to vocational campuses), attend the general public high school, or setup your own vocational plans with an employer (like an internship).

I'm getting a degree teaching Spanish/English as a second language and a second major in public relations. This leads me to also wonder about those who want to specialize in two unrelated fields such as myself.
There wouldn't be majors/minors at trade schools. Trade schools teach you everything you need to know about a single trade or at least get you started down a trade. I'm not talking ultra-specific here, just an overview of a trade and some fundamental concepts. For instance, the business trade school would cover all the fundamentals from financing, to taxation, to open and closing a business, to leadership structures inside of a business, to specific roles each position plays. You basically cover all the material that would be covered in the first two years of college. Since businesses love multilingual employees, your language classes would appear at college level as would the material that is specific to the position you want to take in business.

I would imagine the schools would be 8 hours a day--morning is instructional ("book smart") and afternoon is application ("street smart"). Ehm, during the application portion of the day, you're actually earning money which keeps the costs low while you gain experience.


Also, I use algebra every day, statistics as well.
The only time I use algebra is in scaling images using MS Paint. I really have no use for statistics. Programming, of course, revolves around the concept of algebra but beyond the concept of variables, it really has no direct application.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

A low income family can't pick up and move wherever, and dormitories are expensive. Moreso than tuition even at my school.

Also, that would jip me out of my ability to take language through 4 years of high school as I did.

If they don't offer the classes, how am I supposed to take 7 years of German or 4 of Spanish? I'd likely still be learning to communicate with half of my family.

Also, public relations is fairly interdisciplinary, and business alone would not cut it. There are foundations of marketing, economics, journalism and media studies, communications, among other things - taxation would be something mostly irrelevant.

I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but if we're going to use it to prepare for careers, we need to remember not everyone wants to major in something so conventional and flooded as management or as menial as HVAC and auto repair.

I think every school should be like my school, except on steroids. We have a minimum requirement of 1 internship.

Perhaps 1 every semester after completing the basics required for that job?

Then again this puts jobs for fresh graduates at risk because companies can draw free labor from 3rd and 4th year uni students who know just as much for the most part.

[FordGT90Concept]

If they don't offer the classes, how am I supposed to take 7 years of German or 4 of Spanish? I'd likely still be learning to communicate with half of my family.
You'd get your seven or four years of language in college but, because they don't have as much material to cover in terms of your career, you'll be taking 3-4 language classes simutaneously at the college so you could finish it in much less time.


I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but if we're going to use it to prepare for careers, we need to remember not everyone wants to major in something so conventional and flooded as management or as menial as HVAC and auto repair.
They can always do an internship instead if the vocational system doesn't offer it.


Perhaps 1 every semester after completing the basics required for that job?
Every afternoon, you are working for the school which, remember, is a business. You are an employee of that business. It's the same or better than an internship. It would benefit communities too. For instance, if there is a mechanical vocational school in your area and your mower breaks down, you could take it to these vocational schools to have it fixed for much less than taking it to a lawncare repair shop--however, you won't get it back as fast. You still pay them for the job but not as much as you would go else where because of the time inconvincence.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

You'd get your seven or four years of language in college but, because they don't have as much material to cover in terms of your career, you'll be taking 3-4 language classes simutaneously at the college so you could finish it in much less time.

That's a horrid idea - Because I've had my 7 of German and 4 of Spanish and want 4 more of each in college, pure fluency and beyond (knowledge of the literature etc.) is the goal. Also, when you've got the first 2 years being composed primarily of an intro German and intro Spanish class, that leaves only 9 credit hours or 3 classes per semester you can put into your business major, and still means that you'd have to go to college for much longer to attain the same language proficiency.


They can always do an internship instead if the vocational system doesn't offer it.

Again, putting students who JUST acquired their general knowledge degree into an internship with no background on the actual field and no institution willing to teach them about it will do nothing - it'll be at the detriment of the business (and likely make it never happen because of this reason) because they will become the educator.



Every afternoon, you are working for the school which, remember, is a business. You are an employee of that business. It's the same or better than an internship. It would benefit communities too. For instance, if there is a mechanical vocational school in your area and your mower breaks down, you could take it to these vocational schools to have it fixed for much less than taking it to a lawncare repair shop--however, you won't get it back as fast. You still pay them for the job but not as much as you would go else where because of the time inconvincence.

The local community college here does that with auto repair and the likes, but placing every student into a job when they could want to focus on things that require much more broad and a greater depth of studies will only detriment the student as a learner, the graduate as a performer, and the community as a whole.

[FordGT90Concept]

Again, putting students who JUST acquired their general knowledge degree into an internship with no background on the actual field and no institution willing to teach them about it will do nothing - it'll be at the detriment of the business (and likely make it never happen because of this reason) because they will become the educator.
You'd be surprised at how many jobs out there only want you to have a high school diploma. They would rather spend two-three weeks training you than pay extra because you have a degree.

Yes, it is a detriment to the business because you are dealing with inexperienced employees but they also benefit by not having to pay them as much. In the end, it is win (cheap labor for the employer)-win (experience for the employee).

If the employer doesn't want any part in it, they could always turn the internship away.


The local community college here does that with auto repair and the likes, but placing every student into a job when they could want to focus on things that require much more broad and a greater depth of studies will only detriment the student as a learner, the graduate as a performer, and the community as a whole.
There is such thing as learning too much and applying too little. The more that happens (and it happens a lot in our current school system) the more money and time is wasted. Trades that require a lot of fundamental knowledge like research obviously will have more focus on studies but, careers that need very little knowledge like house construction will focus more on actually doing.

Very, very few trades out there require more knowledge than application skills.

[T3hPwn3r3r]

You can't impart knowledge for some careers over 2-3 weeks, and if the vast majority of employers recognize this and want no part in it, what is to be made of these kids who can get no internships? Their time is wasted.

You keep focusing on manual-labor trades as if those are the only jobs out there, I'm talking about careers. Any high schooler can go out and learn HVAC, but you forget that it takes years of dedicated in-class AND on the job training to be qualified as a CPA, and to put them into trade school before giving them the knowledge they need to function and also severely decreasing the amount of risk for error would be simply mad. I don't want someone fresh out of high school cheating me out of money on my taxes, or working for my PR firm being a drain on resources.

It's a good idea in theory, but in most cases outside of manual labor/trades that are usually apprenticed for in some manner anyway or that can be acquired through a 2 year vocational degree - it doesn't work.

[FordGT90Concept]

You can't impart knowledge for some careers over 2-3 weeks, and if the vast majority of employers recognize this and want no part in it, what is to be made of these kids who can get no internships? Their time is wasted.
They'll quickly realize there is no demand for that career and are forced to make a tough decision: either move to a place that teaches this stuff (also has it in demand) or find a different career to pursue. Because these trade schools are largely private businesses, they will naturally reflect which jobs are most needed in the region.


You keep focusing on manual-labor trades as if those are the only jobs out there, I'm talking about careers. Any high schooler can go out and learn HVAC, but you forget that it takes years of dedicated in-class AND on the job training to be qualified as a CPA, and to put them into trade school before giving them the knowledge they need to function and also severely decreasing the amount of risk for error would be simply mad. I don't want someone fresh out of high school cheating me out of money on my taxes, or working for my PR firm being a drain on resources.
Careers don't exist anymore. Most people, in their lifetime, end up working multiple careers because of changes in the economy. We're in the midst of one of those transition periods now.

Like I said before, mornings are devoted to studies (unless they're done with the necessary material) and the afternoon focuses on application (basically shifts roles from teacher/student to employer/employee). If you just started at the trade school, the first few months may be entirely studies because you don't have many skills to apply yet.


It's a good idea in theory, but in most cases outside of manual labor/trades that are usually apprenticed for in some manner anyway or that can be acquired through a 2 year vocational degree - it doesn't work.
Depending on your parent's age, there's a good chance they learned a trade using similar means (but not facilitated as part of an education system). If not your parents, most likely at least one of your grandparents did.


Also, if you're looking for a degree in something no trade school would cover (like nuclear engineer), you'd have to take a path straight to college. The question mark here is if 9-12th grades cover any material that is essential to the college degree. If no, then we could be seeing 18-22 year old nuclear engineers. If yes, either the college has to expand their ciriculium to fill the void or the colleges would require students complete the high-school level diploma before proceeding.

In effect, what I'm saying is make school mandatory through grade 8. After that, encourage the adaptation of trade schools so students that know what career they want to pursue can pursue it. If they don't know, they can continue along existing paths.