|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2010 11:01 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| comm wrote: |
| Visitorq and Recessiontime believe (I think) in a "society" which effects us, but which we are better off not trying to manipulate. As with the success of capitalism itself, a "society" is better built by the pursuit of happiness of each individual, rather than attempting to impose your view of how the collective should be advanced. |
I just literally think of "society" as a whole bunch of individual people. I'm about as divorced from the abstract collectivist notion of it as you could be. This is because I know for an absolute fact that the abstract notion of "society" doesn't really exist.
| Quote: |
| On the other hand, I think Leon and BB believe in a "society" in which we as individuals are responsible for the environment we interact with. Their "society" is a situation in which it's important to intentionally encourage positive conditions for those around you, thereby creating benefit for yourself. For example, the more potential inventors we train, the more useful inventions will be created. |
Actually this doesn't contradict anything I've said at all... The difference is that I don't advocate forcing others to do things that will benefit "society" (ie. using it as an excuse to impose my word view onto others, as control freaks are wont to do).
Encouraging others to do well is perfectly good and admirable; thinking you know what is better for others than they themselves do (children aside) is arrogant and unfounded. People seeing themselves as part of society in order to justify their sense of entitlement is equally as reprehensible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2010 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| There is no "we as a society" (even though you've no doubt been taught this all your life). In reality there's only you, me, and a whole bunch of of other individuals, each of whom are responsible for their own lives and decisions. Nobody is entitled to another person's money, or for anything except their own fundamental liberties. To treat everyone as a collective (no matter how well-intentioned) is an affront to human dignity. |
I feel your pain. There's very few wildernesses left to seclude yourself in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2010 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| There is no "we as a society" (even though you've no doubt been taught this all your life). In reality there's only you, me, and a whole bunch of of other individuals, each of whom are responsible for their own lives and decisions. Nobody is entitled to another person's money, or for anything except their own fundamental liberties. To treat everyone as a collective (no matter how well-intentioned) is an affront to human dignity. |
I feel your pain. There's very few wildernesses left to seclude yourself in. |
Sure there are. For one as lacking in reading comprehension as yourself, northern Canada might be a good place to start (nary a fellow human around for a thousand square miles). As for me, I'm decidedly a big city person. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2010 11:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| As for me, I'm decidedly a big city person. |
Apologies. I didn't realize you'd be more in favor of apartment hermitages. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Privateer
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 12, 2010 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/dec/12/riots-fire-anger-defining-political-moment
| Quote: |
| "Politicians don't care about young people as we don't vote as much. We are just collateral damage." |
| Quote: |
| "There is a slim chance of going to university now," said Roze Brooks, 17. |
| Quote: |
| Young people are discussing fears about their financial futures. "Debt for ever?" asked Holly Carlile, 22, from the University of Birmingham. "Will we ever be out of rented accommodation? How are we expected to put a single foot on the property ladder?" |
'Austerity' means everything for the rich and screw the middle class. What will it take to get a government that acts in the interests of the citizens? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Privateer
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 12, 2010 3:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Privateer wrote: |
What will it take to get a government that acts in the interests of the citizens? |
It will take voters not sabotaging themselves in the poll booths. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 12, 2010 6:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
The interests of the citizenry varies from citizen to citizen. Even then the citizens don't always know what they want.
The best solution I can think of is to maximize local control at the State and County level. The issues a national government deals with should be minimal because it is usually only very basic issues that people can agree on- such as make sure we aren't invaded and you can drive from one state to the next. Monetary policy is the one that is necessary, but unfortunately one of the more difficult, especially with a floating currency.
When one has an aging population, in a world with limited resources, having one's education policy being determined at the national level by the government in such a fashion is a recipe for trouble, especially as non-parenthood continues to grow in popularity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Konglishman
Joined: 14 Sep 2007
Location: Nanjing
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 12, 2010 6:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
The interests of the citizenry varies from citizen to citizen. Even then the citizens don't always know what they want.
The best solution I can think of is to maximize local control at the State and County level. The issues a national government deals with should be minimal because it is usually only very basic issues that people can agree on- such as make sure we aren't invaded and you can drive from one state to the next. Monetary policy is the one that is necessary, but unfortunately one of the more difficult, especially with a floating currency.
When one has an aging population, in a world with limited resources, having one's education policy being determined at the national level by the government in such a fashion is a recipe for trouble, especially as non-parenthood continues to grow in popularity. |
Actually, the US government on a national level, for the most part does not have that much control over education. Sure, there are some minimum national standards that are in place, etc., but the reality is that the funding and resources for schools are all determined at a county (no, not country) level. So, some people would actually argue that the national government has too little control over education.
Now I am not sure if that is the exact stance that I would take, but nonetheless, some drastic action does need to be taken at a national level. Personally, I would like to see some sort of New Deal type of approach to improving education in America. And yes, I do know about Teach for America, but that falls greatly short of what I would have in mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Privateer
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 5:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Privateer wrote: |
What will it take to get a government that acts in the interests of the citizens? |
It will take voters not sabotaging themselves in the poll booths. |
In the run up to the last election in America you had a presidential candidate who talked a lot about change without actually promising anything specific. Perhaps voters allowed themselves to read too much into it, but that's understandable.
In England we had a political party leader and a whole lot of the candidates within that party promising very specifically that they would not vote for the measure that they have now (with a few honourable exceptions) voted in. Very often it is the case that the electorate seems to vote against its own interests, but not this time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
goniff
Joined: 31 Dec 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 6:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
"this effete corps of impudent snobs"
that was the original quote 40 years ago that made 'effete' a buzzword
remember who said it and what became of him?
I hope the English students... I say English because the jocks and taffs have a different situation...kick out the jams and bring down this unseemly coalition...
British students are usually quite docile when it comes to politics and demonstrations but I think this is about to change... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
comm
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Konglishman wrote: |
| Personally, I would like to see some sort of New Deal type of approach to improving education in America. And yes, I do know about Teach for America, but that falls greatly short of what I would have in mind. |
1. Have the federal government establish standardized tests for all grades. Form an accreditation body which can evaluate schools (or homeschool teachers) on compliance with teaching information necessary for their grade level's test.
2. Have the federal government issue an $X* education voucher to each student, which is valid at any accredited institution (private, public, or properly evaluated homeschool teachers).
3. If you don't want the type of education the government is offering, you can opt out, but get no education voucher.
*$X = approx the average currently spent educating a student for 1 year.
By this system, the institutions which teach the best get the most students. It's not based on the ignorant mother's opinions and it's not dependent on living in a good neighborhood to get a good education. It doesn't cost much more than what we're doing now and if you think the gubmint is brainwashin' yer youngins then you have an out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Privateer wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Privateer wrote: |
What will it take to get a government that acts in the interests of the citizens? |
It will take voters not sabotaging themselves in the poll booths. |
In the run up to the last election in America you had a presidential candidate who talked a lot about change without actually promising anything specific. Perhaps voters allowed themselves to read too much into it, but that's understandable.
In England we had a political party leader and a whole lot of the candidates within that party promising very specifically that they would not vote for the measure that they have now (with a few honourable exceptions) voted in. Very often it is the case that the electorate seems to vote against its own interests, but not this time. |
If this is really the first time ever that Liberal Democrats have lied to their constituents, then I agree that based on what you describe they didn't vote against their interests. I don't follow British politics enough to know the Liberal Democrat record of keeping their promises, though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
recessiontime
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Konglishman
Joined: 14 Sep 2007
Location: Nanjing
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| comm wrote: |
| Konglishman wrote: |
| Personally, I would like to see some sort of New Deal type of approach to improving education in America. And yes, I do know about Teach for America, but that falls greatly short of what I would have in mind. |
1. Have the federal government establish standardized tests for all grades. Form an accreditation body which can evaluate schools (or homeschool teachers) on compliance with teaching information necessary for their grade level's test.
2. Have the federal government issue an $X* education voucher to each student, which is valid at any accredited institution (private, public, or properly evaluated homeschool teachers).
3. If you don't want the type of education the government is offering, you can opt out, but get no education voucher.
*$X = approx the average currently spent educating a student for 1 year.
By this system, the institutions which teach the best get the most students. It's not based on the ignorant mother's opinions and it's not dependent on living in a good neighborhood to get a good education. It doesn't cost much more than what we're doing now and if you think the gubmint is brainwashin' yer youngins then you have an out. |
At least on the face of it, that sounds like a reasonable proposal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
