Schools , race , testing.

[aneeshm]

Won't that create huge waiting lists for the better performing schools? How will it improve the poorer schools? Won't they need lots of money to hire the more 'successful' and 'better performing' teachers/administrators? How would this practically make a kid learn e.g. mathematics or physics better?

*sigh*

I am not an economist, but this makes even me, with my very limited knowledge of economics, cringe.

There won't be huge waiting lists for the better schools because there will be no artificial restriction on supply, as there is now. What works will be adopted by everyone who wants to remain competitive. Those who don't will die out.

It will improve the poorer schools by either forcing them to adopt what works, or driving them out of business due to competitors taking their place, and offering better service.

They won't need a lot of money to hire the better teachers and admins because there won't be such a shortage of teachers/admins once the voucher system comes into place. First, because they will cut most of the pork and crap if it hindering academic performance. A school will build up a reputation for good academics first, and invest in playgrounds and stuff only later. Secondly, because more people will want to be teachers, as they will get better pay under this system , because of the nature of vouchers (vouchers are a much more efficient system, as the private school has no incentive to waste a single cent on bureaucratic overhead - thus the same money invested in vouchers will get us a significantly better return in terms of schooling).

Secondly, once teaching is shorn of most of the bullcrap baggage which it has now, and teachers' salaries become competitive, a better quality of people will choose to enter the profession.

This would make children learn mathematics and physics better because they will choose to go the the schools which can teach them better. Now that they have a choice, they will choose the school which works instead of that which doesn't, but which they are violently coerced into paying for. The ones which don't teach them properly will be outcompeted by those that do. That is how quality will improve.

All these problems you have enumerated exist in a framework with an assumption of an artificial restriction on supply (as there is now).

 

[El_Machinae]

But we aren't importing smart hard working children from there. Those kids come from a "be your best" culture that is abundant in most parts of Asia and the sub-continent. A number of people talk bad about how the Indians own all the 7-11s but don't go and get one them self. I know a guy who owns 2 7-11s a Duncan Donuts, 3 laundry mats and a ethnic food store. Any one can do it with an education and a will to work. Hard work and learning. Thats a message you don't see being driven into kids heads in America particularly minority kids by way of popular culture. Blacks are told to be rappers and ball players, latinos are told to play base ball. Criminals are held to a higher standard in minority culture then scientists.

We come from slightly different immigration cultures. A huge percentage of the Far East immigrants we get up here are wealthy people migrating to a better life. This means that their kids have had better advantages and that the parents have some idea of how hard work leads to success.

Black Culture doesn't tell them to not do well in school. It tells them that they can succeed without school, which is true for some, but only if you can rap or if are athletic. It doesn't say to do bad in school though.

I get the impression, though, that there's a strong feeling that school is useless or doesn't help very much (no matter how hard one works). This is kinda true when viewed in small examples, but as a cultural attitude it's a huge problem.

 

[aneeshm]

Achievers are also treated as "traitors to the race", and accused of "acting white".

 

[Red Door]

Achievers are also treated as "traitors to the race", and accused of "acting white".

No, that doesn't occur anymore.

 

[El_Machinae]

That's not really what I was talking about, but it's obliquely related.

 

[Bill3000]

Of course I'd never say anything as ridiculous as that.

Instead, I'm saying that no human is entitled to any education at all.

Universal declaration of human rights disagrees with you.

 

[El_Machinae]

maybe some people are genetically superior to others.

Absolutely, some people are genetically superior to others.

That said, racism is an example of unevolved thinking. A chimp can be a racist.

 

[aneeshm]

Universal declaration of human rights disagrees with you.

If the Universal Declaration of Human Rights declared that every human was entitled to a planet, and the machinery to terraform it, or to a billion dollars, that still wouldn't be a right, would it?

As for this argument - appeal to authority, anyone?

 

[aneeshm]

Isn't it odd that white people allways get the best result in any study, school related or not

Both us and the Jews completely pwn you academically, hard.

EDIT: But I guess you'd say that I am an Aryan, and therefore I don't really count.

 

[aneeshm]

or maybe not. show me how they are.

Trivial proof: the fact that we exist today means that we are genetically superior to the people who preceded us but did not manage to pass on their genes.

 

[aneeshm]

Does that still happen when income is accounted for?

I'd guess so, assuming culture is a factor. Indians are education freaks.

 

[aneeshm]

our family started out that way in the U.S. though my parents brought from India this Spartan educational discipline, and so I haven't really been disadvantaged very much.

The usual pattern is different for two different types of immigrants:

a) Unskilled, low-income: the first generation suffers tremendously, but passed on to their children the accumulated capital of a good education and a very good educational and work ethic. The second generation builds on that, and having seen the hardships of their childhood and families, give their children everything they possibly can. By this time, Indians have managed to solidly insert themselves into influential positions of whatever happens to be the elite of that society, and to gain a great degree of influence, direct or indirect, over its power structures. This is built on a foundation of financial success.

b) Skilled, high-income: what is happening right now. We don't know how it will turn out. But usually, complete assimilation happens within three generations.

 

[Bill3000]

If the Universal Declaration of Human Rights declared that every human was entitled to a planet, and the machinery to terraform it, or to a billion dollars, that still wouldn't be a right, would it?

What the hell? Sure, education is a positive right, but that is the most stupid strawman that I have seen. Educatio is a necessity for any human - sure, not necessarily college level education, but reading, writing, and basic math? Absolutely. And besides, without a right to education you cannot possibly have equal opportunities, and you'll just form a bunch of segregated classes just like the old days. You can't use the excuse that the poor are poor because they don't "work hard" if they can't even bloody read because they can't afford to go to school.

As for this argument - appeal to authority, anyone?

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the closest thing we have to a global consensus on human rights. It's the document that gives you the right to argue that Islam is obsolete, as it does not follow the principles of it; it triumphs any religious or cultural morality. But it goes both ways.

I'd guess so, assuming culture is a factor. Indians are education freaks.

If they were, then they'd have a literacy rate higher than 65%. Try getting that up before you talk about your culture being education freaks, bub.

Trivial proof: the fact that we exist today means that we are genetically superior to the people who preceded us but did not manage to pass on their genes.

Not necessarily. Other than the fact that natural selection is obsolete when it comes to humanity, (due to healthcare and the like) all it means is that your children are having a high proability of adapting to a particular environment, not that you are "genetically superior" - there is really no such thing.

 

[AL_DA_GREAT]

My grandfather was a refugee from Estonia. He graduated from the elite Univirsity handelshögskolan. Being an immigrant didn't stop him, nor did having illitrate parents.

 

[El_Machinae]

My grandfather was a refugee from Estonia. He graduated from the elite Univirsity handelshögskolan. Being an immigrant didn't stop him, nor did having illitrate parents.

So, not only do you have the genetics to excel but you also have a much superior opportunity than your grandfather did (i.e., literacy).

Did he need to be a thug to succeed? Or was he able to pull it all together by using his brain?

 

[AL_DA_GREAT]

So, not only do you have the genetics to excel but you also have a much superior opportunity than your grandfather did (i.e., literacy).

Did he need to be a thug to succeed? Or was he able to pull it all together by using his brain?

no he never commited a crime. He became one of the higher bosses at Ericson. working directly under the president. National socialists have infiltrated more orginisations than you think. Of the three refugees that where children that he escaped with one became a lawyer with his own firm and one became a historian. None of them spoke a word of swedish when they came here in their mid teens. They came from peasent families.