It's clear I know nothing about economics.

[aehurst]

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian But, AEH; You've got to admit that an important part of the indebtedness now so prevalent was the result of irresponsible easing of credit on homes and credit cards. Not only were the banks offering credit cards to anyone with a pulse, many of the big box stores were too. I think anyone who carries more than two major credit cards (or any store card) is cruising for a bruising. I have two with the same bank and I can easily check where they stand on the web. My wife is a cash shopper for the most part; gets a chunk of cash at an ATM every Monday and regulates her weekly spending based on what's left in her wallet.

I would agree with everything you say. The point I was trying to make is that neither people nor the Protestant ethic has changed. People borrowed more because they could. The more they borrowed, the more money was created, and the bigger the bubble got.

I have 3 major credit cards.... one each MasterCard and Visa that I carry in my wallet. The 3rd is tucked away in a fire proof lock box should I ever lose my wallet and have to cancel everything. The three cards are from three different banks.... so if I ever get PO'd by a bank I can dump them with no problem. All 3 cards start the month with a zero balance.... I have not paid interest on a credit card since the 70s. I save money and collect interest (not much lately), not borrow money and pay interest. Debt free is the way to go through life.

None of this has anything to do with Protestant (or any other religious) ethics. (I haven't been inside a church for a service in at least 20 years.... that was when the church I attended became a political organization and mostly, in my view, on the wrong side of too many issues).

As a side note.... our state legislature just passed a bill that will permit holders of concealed hand gun permits to carry those weapons to church. Churches, of course, oppose the bill. How's that for splitting the right wing vote?

[aehurst]

Quote: Originally Posted by Woodsman Actually, the guy mentions that. Viz: "In fact, around 1970 real wages for most non-management workers stopped increasing, and have stayed flat, and even declined, since then." ........

Yup. Real wages have been flat for a very long time. But, I am not sure that equals to people "having" to borrow more. I would put the blame more on unions' inability to keep their memberships thriving and a shift to fewer manufacturing jobs (and the resulting pressure on the middle class). Those and an increased interdependence with foreign markets. (Okay, CWT, throw trickle down in there, too.)

Note I said decreased manufacturing jobs.... not decreased manufacturing. Manufacturing output has been up pretty much every year since the 70s. Blame that on robots, computers and such along with our inability to develop middle class replacement jobs that are as productive as the ones we lost. For labor to prosper, labor must create value.

[NovaScotian]

I like the notion of a third card held as a spare. Doesn't the bank mind that you don't use it?

I have two (as I said earlier), but one of them has a very low credit limit (I have to keep hounding the bank to make that so). That's the one I use when I don't trust the vender or the setting. I have carried a credit card balance forward exactly twice in the last 20 years (but it's a line of credit card, so interest is just a bit above prime); once when we did a major renovation to the house, and once when my wife and I went to South Africa and included in our trip a ride on the Blue Train from Cape Town to Pretoria, a 3-day safari with our own guide, and numerous other visits around Cape Town.

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian This is a process that will continue inexorably. Surely you don't argue that we should restrict technology?

No, but we shouldn't see it with rose colored glasses either.

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian Too many North American workers are "hands & eyes" folks or low-end service providers, and not enough are in the "creative class" (in which I include engineers, IT professionals, research and development types, consultants of all kinds, entrepreneurs, inventors, artists, entertainers, musicians, etc. -- folks who think for a living). That's a major failing of the educational system, not of technology, per se.

Sure, there's a problem with education: parents.

That's besides the point though: My mother-in-law was in a concentration camp as a child, came to this country not knowing the language, and worked in a millinery factory. She paid cash for her first house. Something's dramatically different now and it has nothing to do with education.

[aehurst]

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian This is a process that will continue inexorably. Surely you don't argue that we should restrict technology? ...... That's a major failing of the educational system, not of technology, per se.

Exactly so. Our good high schools turn out students who can read, write and think a little. But that hardly prepares them in and of itself to be able to compete in today's world because the system leaves out the job training. That's fine for those going to college, but I firmly believe our public education system should be putting a lot more emphasis on teaching vocational skills and not leaving that function to someone else.

Sure, we have an abundance of technical schools. But they cost as much as going to a public college, and tuition has exploded in the past 30 years.

No comment on the not so good high schools... that's a whole different bucket of worms.

[aehurst]

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian I like the notion of a third card held as a spare. Doesn't the bank mind that you don't use it?

They haven't.... yet. Guess one could rotate the spare, or use it only for a single recurring charge that doesn't require one to carry the card around.

[aehurst]

Quote: Originally Posted by cwtnospam Sure, there's a problem with education: parents....

I hear this a lot from our public school advocates. And, no doubt, there is a tad of truth in it. But, it's just too easy a cop out to blame it all on the families.... many are working two jobs or are single parents. The students and their environment have changed... the education system seems to just continue to use a cookie cutter approach to education. Blame it on someone else and go home at 3pm. There is something very wrong with a high school that has a 66% graduation rate, and we have way too many of those.

I'm not blaming teachers.... but something is not working the way it should, and today's schools are not keeping up with today's world.

[NovaScotian]

Quote: Originally Posted by aehurst I'm not blaming teachers.... but something is not working the way it should, and today's schools are not keeping up with today's world.

Research (and tons of anecdotal evidence) points out that the largest single component in the success of students is in fact the quality of their teachers, and yet we maintain egalitarian standards for teachers -- merit is not rewarded (nor measured in any way) so there is no incentive or need to go the extra mile.

My wife is a retired teacher (33 years in elementary schools) and she makes the additional points that the trend away from rote learning of any kind (like the multiplication table which hone memory), the notion of holistic reading in classes where 50% of them require phonetic help, the dilution and inflation of grading systems, the notion of promoting children who have not completed a grade's requirements (i.e. so the kids can be with their friends), etc. have led to the downfall of education in North America. Two other major factors in her opinion are the inclusion of mentally disabled children in regular classes to the detriment of all the normal kids, and the gradual diminution of punishments of any kind that leave teachers powerless.

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian Research (and tons of anecdotal evidence) points out that the largest single component in the success of students is in fact the quality of their teachers, and yet we maintain egalitarian standards for teachers -- merit is not rewarded (nor measured in any way) so there is no incentive or need to go the extra mile.

Whose research? Standards are bureaucratic garbage intended to make administrators look good.

The problem is discipline. It's lacking at home and almost nonexistent in schools. We tell people who have no intention of learning that they should stay in school. Why? So they can destroy the educations of real students? We should be kicking kids out of school if they don't want to learn, but try that and see what parents do.

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian My wife is a retired teacher (33 years in elementary schools) and she makes the additional points that the trend away from rote learning of any kind (like the multiplication table which hone memory), the notion of holistic reading in classes where 50% of them require phonetic help, the dilution and inflation of grading systems, the notion of promoting children who have not completed a grade's requirements (i.e. so the kids can be with their friends), etc. have led to the downfall of education in North America. Two other major factors in her opinion are the inclusion of mentally disabled children in regular classes to the detriment of all the normal kids, and the gradual diminution of punishments of any kind that leave teachers powerless.

These are all done to make parents fell better about their kids. We can't hurt the little thug's feelings. That would hurt his self-esteem!

Parents forget that kids are uneducated, not stupid. When you water down the curriculum to bolster self-esteem you tell kids that you don't think they're smart enough to do the work. That not only hurts their self-esteem, but it leaves them unprepared to compete with the rest of the world. It also destroys teacher morale as they find themselves baby sitting more than teaching.

If you think I'm wrong, I suggest that you do a little substitute teaching to see it first-hand.

[aehurst]

Wow. As TW wrote earlier...."So much to say, so little internet."

Guess I have divergent views on almost everything said about schools.

Back in the 50s, where I went to high school, they had simple solutions to most of these issues. The teachers arbitrarily divided students into remedial, average, and honor groups and put them in separate classes.... the parents had no vote in the placement and it was not discussed with them. The remedial group got by as best they could. The average kids got the basics, and the honors group got all they could handle. Several of the honors kids went on to be Rhode Scholars, and we got more than our share of National Merit Scholarships. And, well, the rest of us did okay, too.

The principal had a huge paddle with holes bored in it, and it was used frequently. No need to call a parent about it.... kid would have gotten the spanking with the parent's full support and another one when they got home.... kids were quick to learn to take their spanking rather than call a parent and risk getting two.

We provided our own books, purchased at a book store downtown. We provided our own way to school and home.... no school buses for those who lived inside the city limits. You stayed after school for misbehavior and missed your ride home, well again, your problem not the school's.

If you got expelled, you were expelled... no alternative school. Come back next year when your attitude is better, or join the Army or dig ditches. It was your problem, not the school's.

That said.... do you really want a 16 year old under achiever with a behavior problem in your kid's 6th grade class? Better to pass them on and put them into a remedial group where they can learn, perhaps, something. A little is better than nothing and better than being on the street. Let's be realistic... not all our kids are above average and we average folk need to feel like we have a little value, too, rather than "failed" because we cannot keep up with the smarter kids.

I would support inclusion of kids with disabilities into normal classrooms IF they can do the work with a reasonable accommodation (e.g. an aide, sign language interpreter, or perhaps just a little more time to complete a test). I would not support self contained classrooms or segregated settings for the kids with disabilities. If they cannot do algebra, fine, don't put them into the algebra class. But, do we really need to exclude them from recess, finger painting, or other subjects where they can do the work? Or from any interaction with their peers? I think no. And, I think that without regard to their civil rights under any number of laws and court rulings (IDEA, ADA, Rehab Act, and on and on).

Sure, teachers are the key. That, and supporting teachers by providing an atmosphere where learning can occur. Some research I've read indicated that a child who gets a bad teacher for one year can recover with a little work. But, if the kid gets a bad teacher two years in a row then the child is probably lost permanently (education wise).

My experience with public schools with my kids, both now around 40, is by and large too may teachers just really don't care that much. Many do care, many do a great job, but until we can get rid of the dredges that are pulling the rest of the system down we have a problem. Big problem.

In my most humble opinion, unmotivated parents are the least of our problems when it comes to public education. Sure, we can blame the problems on civil rights attorneys and court rulings, but do we really want to go there? It is a public school system and by all reason must serve ALL citizens.... not just the smart ones, not just the model students, and not just the students who look like the teacher.

Shouldn't the schools be meeting the needs of those who are not college bound as well as those who are? I really think this is key to making the US competitive in a world market.

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by aehurst That said.... do you really want a 16 year old under achiever with a behavior problem in your kid's 6th grade class?

No, I want him out digging ditches - with a hand shovel. No mechanical aid. If he can't set a good example he can set a good example of what not to be.

Quote: Originally Posted by aehurst Sure, teachers are the key. That, and supporting teachers by providing an atmosphere where learning can occur.

You aren't supporting teachers or creating an atmosphere where learning can occur by keeping that 16 year old under achiever with a behavior problem in any class room.

Quote: Originally Posted by aehurst Shouldn't the schools be meeting the needs of those who are not college bound as well as those who are?

Yes, and the key is to get rid of those who aren't there to learn.

All it takes is one bad kid to ruin a class, and we've got plenty of classes with one bad kid.

[Woodsman]

Quote: Originally Posted by aehurst As a side note.... our state legislature just passed a bill that will permit holders of concealed hand gun permits to carry those weapons to church. Churches, of course, oppose the bill. How's that for splitting the right wing vote?

Do you get to carry the weapons to the communion rail? I suppose you ought to, as leaving them on the pews would be a hazard, a kid could get hold of them and shoot up the church.

In the Middle Ages clerics were not supposed to shed blood, but they were recruited from the military aristocracy, and some certainly fought. There is an apocryphal story of a bishop who got around the canons reprehending the "edge of the sword" by using a mace. Thwack! Perhaps this should be updated for the firearm age, celebrants at Mass to be restricted to certain calibres.

You might enjoy knowing that in Norwegian, the porch or narthex of a church is called våpenhus, literally "weapon-house". I.e., that's where you left your sword. Later, perhaps your arquebus, when the rural militia trained on the church green straight after service.

[Woodsman]

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian That's the one I use when I don't trust the vender or the setting.

I use a direct-debit rather than a credit card, but still, if I don't trust the vendor, I use cash! Or better still, don't make the trade.

Cash is simply a superior technology. It works when the lines are busy, is immune to accidental demagnetisation, and not even the most brilliant cracker can access the rest of your money. If Apple could re-invent it with a cool name and image, it would sweep credit cards off the board.

[Woodsman]

Quote: Originally Posted by aehurst They haven't.... yet. Guess one could rotate the spare, or use it only for a single recurring charge that doesn't require one to carry the card around.

You mean American banks get on your tail if you don't use your card enough? That's sick. For the Visa Gold I carry as holiday emergency, in the manner of Aehurst's lockbox spare, I pay an annual fee, which I regard as reasonable for having an emergency escape hatch, but the bank couldn't care less if I never use the card.

[Woodsman]

Quote: Originally Posted by cwtnospam These are all done to make parents fell better about their kids. We can't hurt the little thug's feelings. That would hurt his self-esteem!

There was an interesting thing in Scientific American a few years back that must be percolating, as I read a newspaper piece here in the sticks a few days ago that invoked the same ideas. SA had said that, so far from it having being experimentally confirmed that low self-esteem leads to aggression, it can be experimentally disconfirmed. Low self-esteem leads to depression, not aggression. What leads to aggression is what they called "unstable high self-esteem" that is based not on accomplishments but on responses: so that everyone is on a hair-trigger about being dissed. And this can be demonstrated in the lab. Our entire childrearing and education philosophy is thus perfectly designed to produce nervous and aggressive losers.

There was another piece in the New York Magazine a couple of years ago, saying that praising a child for its inherent talents, as opposed to for its specific accomplishments, has a most baleful effect.

The local newspaper piece linked the self-esteem movement to the kind of business managers who have just destroyed our civilisation for us -- the Masters of the Universe who are all quite, quite sure that they are outstanding and deserve to be remunerated accordingly. Even that commie rag The Economist was bitching about "the culture of entitlement" in the financial sector and said they still don't "get it". If it's rooted in their having been overpraised and esteem-ified as children, then they never will, will they?

[Woodsman]

Quote: Originally Posted by aehurst The principal had a huge paddle with holes bored in it, and it was used frequently. No need to call a parent about it.... kid would have gotten the spanking with the parent's full support and another one when they got home.... kids were quick to learn to take their spanking rather than call a parent and risk getting two.

And THAT is an enormous difference from our day. In Norway it is now a criminal offence for a parent even to slap a misbehaving child's leg, let alone use a paddle. Apparently the three-year-old intent on torturing its sibling is to be lectured on Kantian moral philosophy.

The nature of parental narcissism has changed. Then, a parent felt ashamed in front of his peers because his child had behaved badly. Now, a parent feels dissed because someone has dared to criticise him through the child. Parents now vow eternal vengeance on anyone impugning their child-rearing skills, especially if they have none whatsoever.

[ArcticStones]

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaScotian Research (and tons of anecdotal evidence) points out that the largest single component in the success of students is in fact the quality of their teachers, and yet we maintain egalitarian standards for teachers -- merit is not rewarded (nor measured in any way) so there is no incentive or need to go the extra mile.

One of the questions that a jury asked before giving my favourite high school teacher a state-wide teaching award was this:

Q. What do you believe is the single-most important quality for a good teacher to have?

A. The ability to recognise when the student is ready to take the next step.

[aehurst]

@CWT

Quote: Parents forget that kids are uneducated, not stupid. When you water down the curriculum to bolster self-esteem you tell kids that you don't think they're smart enough to do the work. That not only hurts their self-esteem, but it leaves them unprepared to compete with the rest of the world. It also destroys teacher morale as they find themselves baby sitting more than teaching.

Really don't think it's entirely about self esteem. Can we really expect a kid with an IQ of 90 to keep up with kids whose IQs are over 100? Much less the brighter kids who are over 110? 90 IS an average IQ, right?

I for one don't like the idea of beating kids to death emotionally because of circumstances beyond their control. Certainly, spankings and holding them back will not improve their IQ. Constant humiliation will not improve their attitude. It's just plain cruel.

[aehurst]

Quote: Originally Posted by Woodsman You might enjoy knowing that in Norwegian, the porch or narthex of a church is called våpenhus, literally "weapon-house". I.e., that's where you left your sword. Later, perhaps your arquebus, when the rural militia trained on the church green straight after service.

Nothing wrong with weapons. They've always been a part of our culture.

As the saying goes around here, "Guns don't kill people, women drivers with cell phones do." (Replace "women" with "men" or delete the word altogether to get politically correct.)

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by aehurst I for one don't like the idea of beating kids to death emotionally because of circumstances beyond their control. Certainly, spankings and holding them back will not improve their IQ. Constant humiliation will not improve their attitude. It's just plain cruel.

Who's making that argument?

I'm not talking about holding back a kid who's struggling! If we could get to the point where that was a major concern our system would be much better than it is. The problem is not struggling kids. It's kids who don't want to do the work and parents who don't come down on them for it. The next time you see some obvious juvenile delinquent with a cell phone, the latest sneakers, or some other kiddie status symbol, think about where he got it and ask yourself why he still has it. Parents reward bad behavior and then blame their kid's poor education on the system. It's ridiculous.